Report of the

Thirty-Eighth National Conference

Weights and Measures

1953

U. S. Department of Commerce

National Bureau of Standards

Miscellaneous Publication 209
SELECTED WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

PUBLICATIONS OF THE

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

NBS Handbook 26

NBS Handbook 37

NBS Handbook 44

NBS Handbook 45

NBS Circular 501

Weights and Measures Administration

Testing of Weighing Equipment

Specifications, Tolerances, and Regulations

for Commercial Weighing and Measuring

Devices

Testing of Measuring Equipment

Federal and State Weights and Measures

Laws

NBS Circular 540 Weights and Measures Case Reference Book

L25

1-25

1.25

5-1.2' AVAILABLE REPORTS OF THE

NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

1946 Miscellaneous Publication 186 40^

1947 Miscellaneous Publication 189 40^

1949 Miscellaneous Publication 195 35 j2 1950 Miscellaneous Publication 199 50^

1951 Miscellaneous Publication 202 50^

1952 Miscellaneous Publication 206 40^

Index to the Reports of the National Conference on Weights and Measures from

the First to the Thirty-sixth, 1905 to 1951

Miscellaneous Publication 203 2o£

ORDER ALL PUBLICATIONS, WITH REMITTANCE, FROM TH

SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, GOVERNMENT PRINTIN<

OFFICE, WASHINGTON 25, D. C.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Sinclair Weeks, Secretary NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS • A. V. Astin, Director

Report of the

Thirty-Eighth National Conference on

Weights and Measures

Attended by Representatives from Various States Sponsored by the National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D. C, May 19, 20, 21, and 22, 1953

National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous Publication 209

Issued December 21, 1953

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D. C. - Price 40 cents

CONTENTS

Page

Officers and Committees v FIRST SESSION—MORNING OF TUESDAY, MAY 19, 1953 Invocation, by R. W. Searles, Deputy County Sealer, Medina, Ohio 1 Address, by Hon. Craig R. Sheaffer, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Domestic Affairs 1 Memorial Service for Departed Members, by R. W. Searles 4 Report on Activities of the National Bureau of Standards, by Dr. A. V. Astin, Director 4 Remarks of J. W. Saybolt, Business Counsellor on Weights and Measures,

Miami, Florida 10 Appointment of Committees 11 Honorarv Life Membership Card Presented to Ralph W. Smith 11 Roll Call of States 11

Roll Call of State and Regional Associations 12 SECOND SESSION—AFTERNOON OF TUESDAY, MAY 19, 1953 Prepackaged Foods, by G. F. Austin, Jr., Deputy Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Detroit, Michigan 12 Report of the Committee on Trading by Weight, Presented by J. Fred True^

Chairman ' 17 Pre-Packaged-Ice-Cream Measure-Containers, by D. H. Williams, Inter- national Association of Ice Cream Manufacturers, Washington, D. C 20 Paper Milk Containers, by D. M. Turnbull, Deputy Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Seattle, Washington 22 Highway Truck Weighing, by James Nicholas, General Manager, Indiana Motor Truck Association, Inc., Indianapolis, Indiana 25 THIRD SESSION—MORNING OF WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 1953 Flour Weights, by Herman Fakler, Vice President, Millers National Federation, Washington, D. C 32 Automatic Package Weighing Machinery, by W. A. Scheurer, President,

National Scale Men's Association, Columbus, Ohio 40 Problems in Livestock Weighing Supervision, by C. L. Richard, Supervisor

of Scales and Weighing, Packers and Stockyards Division, U. S. Depart- ment of Agriculture 46 Problems in Livestock Weighing Supervision (State Responsibility), by

R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, Weights and Measures Section, Department

of Agriculture and Immigration, State of Virginia 50

Electronic Scales, by George F. Graham, Assistant Director of Sales, Streeter-Amet Company, Chicago, Illinois 52 FOURTH SESSION—MORNING OF THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1953 Report of Committee on Weights and Measures Education, Presented by

Charles Morris Fuller, Chairman 56 Remarks of A. T. McPherson, Associate Director, National Bureau of Standards 62

Technicalities in Weights and Measures Court Cases, by Hon. J. A. Murphy,

Assistant Deputy Attorney General, State of New Jersey 63 Report of Committee on Legislation, Presented by M. A. Nelson, Chairman-- 67 Remote Gasoline Pumps, by William B. Johnson, Jr., Manager of Sales, Erie Meter Systems, Inc., Erie, Pennsylvania 69

iii
FIFTH SESSION-AFTERNOON OF THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1953 Page

Report on the Proposed International Conference on Legal Metrology, by

E. C. Crittenden, Consultant, National Bureau of Standards 72 Remarks of Wallace R. Brode, Associate Director, National Bureau of Standards 75 Remarks of Airs. K. M. Schwarz, Attorney-Editor, National Bureau of Standards 75 Report of Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, Presented by

J. G. Rogers, Chairman 75 SIXTH SESSION—MORNING OF FRIDAY, MAY 22, 1953 Remarks of Robert Williams, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Nassau

County, New York 82 Performance of Inspectors and Gasoline Pumps, by W. J. Youden, Consultant, Applied Mathematics Division, and M. W. Jensen, Assistant

Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards 82 Report of Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, Presented by J. P. McBride, Chairman 89 Report of the Conference Committee on Resolutions, Presented by John E. Mahoney, Chairman 97 Report of the Treasurer of the Conference, George F. Austin, Jr 100 Report of Committee on Nominations, and Election of Officers, Presented by C. A. Baker, Chairman ' 100 Meeting of the Executive Committee 101 Persons attending Conference 102

iv
OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES

OFFICERS

(Present and serving during the Thirty-eighth National Conference)

President: Dr. A. V. Astix, Director, National Bureau of Standards.

Vice Presidents: D. G. Nelsox, Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Morris County,

New Jersey. R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, Weights and Measures Section, Division of Markets, Department of Agriculture and Immigration, State of Virginia.

F. M. Greexe, Deputy Commissioner, Food and Drug Commission, State

of Connecticut.

I. M. Levy,* City Sealer, Chicago, Illinois. Secretary: W. S. Busset, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau

of Standards, Washington, D. C. Treasurer: G. F. Austin, Jr.. Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures, Detroit,

Michigan.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

(As elected by the Thirty-eighth National Conference)

A. V. Astix, President

G. F. Austin, Jr., Vice President James E. Boyle, Vice President Fraxk M. Greexe, Vice President \Ex officio.

J. Roy Joxes, Vice President James W. Reese, Vice President

A. C. Samexfixk, Vice President

S. H. Christie, Asst. State Supt., Division of Weights and Measures, Trenton, X. J.

J. F. Corrigax, Deputy State Sealer of Weights and Measures, Providence, R. I. R. L. Flaxagax, State Supervisor of Weights and Measures, Oklahoma City, Okla. Arthur Forrest, Sealer of Weights and Measures, City of Claremont, N. H.

J. W. D. Harvey, Asst. Chemist, State Oil Laboratory, Atlanta, Georgia

H. E. Howard, City Supervisor of Weights and Measures, Miami, Fla. G. L. Johnson, State Director, Division of Weights and Measures, Frankfort,

Ky.

0. A. Kirklaxd, State Inspector of Weights and Measures, Dallas, Tex.

A. J. Mayer, State Director, Division of Weights and Measures, Baton Rouge,

La.

J. I. Moore, State Supervisor, Weights and Measures Division, Raleigh, N. C. H. J. McDade, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, San Diego, Calif. , W. H. Roberts, County Inspector of Weights and Measures, Terre Haute, Ind.

S. H. Seighmax, Asst. State Director, Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures, Harrisburg, Pa. W. K. Tripple, Chief, City Bureau of Weights and Measures, Norfolk, Va.

C. J. Wills, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Portland, Maine

STANDING COMMITTEES

(As constituted at the conclusion of the Thirty-eighth National Conference,

the personnel and organization of each of the standing committees of the Conference are as reported below. As reported, the membership of each committee

"Mr. Levy was unable to be present, due to illness. v
reflects the appointments made by the President of the Conference, changes which

have occurred from expiration of term or other cause, and the elections by the

several committees of chairmen, and in one case secretary, for the ensuing year. The remaining term of office for each committee member, in years, is shown by

the figure in parentheses following each entry.)

COMMITTEE ON SPECIFICATIONS AND TOLERANCES

R. E. Meek, Director, Division of Weights and Measures, State Board of Health,

Indianapolis, Indiana, Chairman. (4) W. S. Bussey, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D. C, Secretary. (2) L. E. Witt, City Sealer of Weights and Measures, Milwaukee, Wis. (1) Robert Williams, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Mineola, N. Y. (3) R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, Weights and Measures Section, Division of Markets, Richmond, Virginia. (5) COMMITTEE ON METHODS OF SALE OF COMMODITIES

J. G. Rogers, State Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Trenton, N. J., Chairman. (2) C. D. Baucom, State Superintendent, Weights and Measures Division, Raleigh, N. C. (1)

J. E. Brenton, Chief, State Bureau of Weights and Measures, Sacramento,

Calif. (3) G. H. Leithauser, Senior Assistant Superintendent, Department of Weights

and Measures, City of Baltimore, Md. (4) E. C. Westwood, Citv Sealer of Weights and Measures, City of Salt Lake City,

Utah. (5) COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION

M. A. Nelson, Chief, State Bureau of Marketing and Enforcement, Lansing,

Mich., Chairman. (4) V. D. Campbell, Deputy State Sealer, Columbus, Ohio. (1) D. M. Turnbull, Supervisor, Division of Licenses and Standards, City of Seattle, Wash. (2) R. M. Bodenweiser, County Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Trenton, N. J. (3) Nalls Berryman, Supervisor, State Weights and Measures Division, Tallahassee, Fla. (5)

. COMMITTEE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES EDUCATION

C. M. Fuller, County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Los Angeles, Calif., Chairman. (2) G. E. Carpenter, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and Measures, Montpelier, Vt. (1) H. E. Crawford, City Inspector of Weights and Measures, Jacksonville, Fla. (3)

J. F. Blickley, Director, State Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures,

Harrisburg, Pa. (4) C. A. Lyon, Director, State Bureau of Weights and Measures, Concord, N. H. (5) COMMITTEE ON TRADING BY WEIGHT

J. F. True, State Sealer, Weights and Measures Division, Topeka, Kans., Chairman. (1) G. L. Johnson, Director, State Division of Weights and Measures, Frankfort,

Ky. (2)

J. W. Reese, Supervisor, State Division of Weights and Measures, Des Moines,

Iowa. (3) A. J. Mayer, Director, State Division of Weights and Measures, Baton Rouge, I La. (4) T. C. Beck, Assistant Director, State Marketing Divisiion, Board of Agriculture,

Oklahoma City, Okla. (5) CHAPLAIN

R. W. Searles, Deputy County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Medina,

Ohio. (1)

vi
COMMITTEES ACTING ONLY DURING THE THIRTY-EIGHTH NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Committee on Nominations: C. A. Baker of New York, Chairman; Nalls Berry- man of Florida, E. R. Fisher of Rhode Island, J. T. Kennedy of the District

of Columbia, R. S. Ackerman of Minneapolis, Minnesota, C. M. Fuller of Los Angeles County, California, Tom Webb of Nashville, Tennessee. Committee on Resolutions: J. E. Mahoney of Maryland, Chairman; C. D. Baucom

of North Carolina, M. 0. Nickon of Dearborn, Michigan, J. M. O'Neil of Cambridge, Massachusetts, A. 0. Oslund of Union City, New Jersey, W. H. Roberts of Vigo County, Indiana, J. C. Goll of North Dakota.

Ladies' Committee: Mrs. R. D. Thompson, Chaiman, Mrs. J. M. Dietz, Mrs.

R. E. Meek, Mrs. A. C. Samenfink, Mrs. W. S. Bussey, Mrs. M. W. Jensen.

In Charge of Registrations: Mrs. F. C. Bell, Mrs. K. M. Schwarz, Mrs. R. E. Taylor.

In Charge of Badges: H. L. Badger,

vii

REPORT OF THE THIRTY-EIGHTH NATIONAL

CONFERENCE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

SPONSORED BY THE NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, AND HELD

AT THE WARDMAN PARK HOTEL, WASHINGTON, D. C, MAY 19, 20,

21, AND 22, 1953 FIRST SESSION—MORNING OF TUESDAY, MAY 19, 1953

(A. V. Astin, President, and D. G. Nelson, Vice President, presiding)

The invocation was delivered by the Conference Chaplain, R. W.

Searles, Deputy County Sealer of Weights and Measures, Medina

County, Ohio.

ADDRESS BY HON. CRAIG R. SHEAFFER, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF

COMMERCE FOR DOMESTIC AFFAIRS

It is my privilege, in behalf of the Department of Commerce, to welcome this 38th National Conference to Washington.

Your varied membership contains representatives of government,

science, and industry. Your endeavors go far back in history.

In fact, Moses is a charter member of your fraternity. For, in giving the law to the children of Israel, the Bible says, he declared:

"Thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure

shalt thou have that thy days may be lengthened in the land."

Yet with an experience dating back to antiquity, custodians of weights and measures are not content to rest on their laurels. One

of the finest things about your group is that you are steadily improving

services and continuallv seeking new developments in vour important

field. As the Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Domestic Affairs, I am proud of the fine record of the National Bureau of Standards in

weights and measures.. You will find that the Bureau is always eager

to help municipal, county, and state officials—and manufacturers,

processors, and businessmen—with problems in this particular area

of public service.

Right now some papers and magazines are describing the new

Administration as a probusiness administration. It is that and more.

President Eisenhower has tapped the talents of the business community, as he has drawn into government executives from agriculture,

labor, the professions, and other segments of society. They are working together as a team. They are endeavoring to decide each issue on the basis of what is best for all Americans.

Let me assure you that former businessmen in government have a genuine appreciation of the value of your particular services. The

determination of quantity is basic to business. Often it is the method

by which profit or loss is established. Whether a manufacturer is

1
buying steel by the ton or a drug firm is selling medicine by the grain,

business depends upon the accuracy of measurement . Your particular field always has been one in which science, business

and government mingle. Society today is a projection of your

experience—all three elements profoundly affect modern life. However, there are some people who are antagonistic to business

and who are trying to give the false impression that a probusiness

administration necessarily must be an antiscience administration.

No accusation could be more inaccurate. Anyone who believes

that misrepresentation has not even tried to ascertain the facts. American business has always had a deep respect for science. It has employed science to improve production and to discover new

materials, new technologies, and new ways of doing things out of which have come new and better goods, and, in many cases, new and

lower prices so that markets could be broadened and the wants of more people satisfied. In fact, the scientist's best friend is the businessman, in or out of government. For not only does business utilize science in industry

and pay it well, but the taxes of business and the donations of business

play a leading role in the support of governmental and institutional

science.

Business and science are partners, working together to bring to mankind all the modern blessings of research, invention, and innovation. It is particularly fitting, therefore, that our Government has

provided that the National Bureau of Standards operate within the

Department of Commerce.

The total annual expenditures today for research alone are more

than three and a half billion dollars. From measurement—your

field—comes greater understanding in science. From the laboratories come weapons on which national security depends. But from the

laboratories, too, are coming new ideas for peacetime progress and

universal happiness.

Any person over 50 years of age was alive before a successful auto

or airplane was developed. But the partnership of technology and

industry has developed the automotive engine so well that it has

produced the greatest economic impact in all history.

Who at the turn of the century could have foreseen the fabulous

number of jobs about to be created in this country? Who could

have foreseen the striking increase in the standards of living of the

American people ? Today a million workers make autos or auto parts. A million and A a half sell or service them. Three out of every four families in America own cars. In comparison with the rest of the world our progress has been j remarkable. Let us hope that our children will live to see the day

when the standards of living in other countries rise to the level that we have attained.

This is capable of achievement, and the whole world will benefit,

but if we permit, through lack of foresight, our standards of living \ to be lowered to the levels existing in other countries, we, in effect, will be guilty of a sin against the rest of the world.

The manner in which business and science have teamed up and j worked together in this country throughout our history, and particu-

| larly since the turn of the century, has made possible a wa}^ of life j

2
, still unbelievable to many in far countries who have only heard about

it and have never seen or enjoyed it. Some may have the feeling that the gains in our standard of living

have been purely materialistic, but walking hand in hand with materialistic gains have been notable gains in spiritual values. When we

j were a poor, struggling nation, our first thought was to better our

position. That accomplished, the American people have never shirked

when disaster struck at home or abroad.

This Spirit of charitableness, coupled with our resources, has been

exemplified by our prompt aid to famine areas, the Tokyo catastrophe,

and to many others right down the years to the recent Winnipeg flood. A purely materialistic population would think only of themselves,

but the individual American, regardless of his political or religious

faith, has helped all over the world when help was needed by the

suffering. He has willingly dug down into his own pocket to do so, and if he had great wealth, he created or supported a foundation for doing the same thing on a larger scale. The world of electricity and chemistry has been pouring out all sorts of new products in the last 15 years. These new inventions

did not originate in garrets. The bulk of them flowed from laboratories financed by highly successful business.

One of the prime reasons why businessmen at all levels of government want more efficiency and less waste is so that, as taxes are

lessened, more money can be diverted to support new explorations

in science.

In the field of oil and petrochemicals, for example, we not only can

expect improved cracking processes for fuels but all sorts of new

developments in fertilizers, insecticides, fumigants, and weed-eradicators, so that eventually the one half of the world's population now on

an inadequate diet may have more food. A full stomach is one of the best bulwarks against the spread of Communism.

This is only one area in which business is financing science in the

operation of Aladdin's Lamp. This is one more proof of the ties that bind them.

I am proud to stand with my fellow businessmen who, in government and in private life, are doing their best to increase the efficiency of the Federal government and to build and sustain the economic

health of America.

We want less government interference with legitimate business and

fewer government burdens piled on taxpayers' shoulders. We want

private enterprise given a better chance to exert its dynamic power.

This determination to encourage free, competitive enterprise is a noble motive, exercised in the interest of all the people. For economic

prosperity means more jobs, more modern conveniences, more money

for worthy causes, more national happiness, more tasks for weighing

and measuring, more opportunities for science to progress beyond

known horizons.

On the military strength, stemming from American economic might,

are based the hopes of captives and the security of the free. So, I gladly welcome you here today to listen to the experts, who

will discuss the many problems of the halls of government, the laboratory and the market place. I welcome you as each contributes his special knowledge and wisdom in advancing our free nation.

Let this conference—this pooling of business, science and government talents—be symbolic of our generation, a partnership of dedi3
cated men and women seeking to make a better world for ourselves

and our children.

(R. W. Searles, Conference Chaplain, conducted an appropriate memorial

service for departed members.)

REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE NATIONAL BUREAU

OF STANDARDS, BY A. V. ASTIN

I appreciate very much the opportunity of making a report on the

activities of the National Bureau of Standards and hope to touch

briefly on a few of the highlights.

The Constitution of the United States gives the Congress power to

fix the standard of weights and measures and has assigned, in turn,

to the Bureau responsibility for developing and maintaining the

standards for physical measurement. There is no regulatory authority assigned with this responsibility. That has been reserved to the

states and municipalities—the local governments which most of you

represent. The Congress, however, assigned to the Bureau the activity of cooperating with the states in securing uniformity in weights

and measures laws and methods of inspection. That authorization

provides the primary justification for this national conference and

for the other activities of the Bureau's Office of Weights and Measures

of which your friend, Mr. W. S. Bussey, is the Chief.

The Bureau's work in the development of standards and physical

measurements is an interesting and never-ending activity since standards must be provided in all areas of science and engineering where

measurements are important. When the Bureau was established 52

years ago there were relatively few standards with which we were

concerned. The very appreciable development and expansion of science and technology since that time is shown by the fact that there

are now several hundred different standards that concern us, such

as those in mechanics, atomic physics, electronics, and radio as well

as the many branches of chemistry.

I would like to cite a few examples of recent achievements. In the

microwave region of the radio frequency we have been concerned with

standards for a variety of measurements. We have recently completed

the development of a precise calorimeter whch permits the accurate

calibration of radio power measuring devices operating at frequencies

of nine million cycles per second. We have also put into operation a new instrument for measuring the magnetic properties of materials in the radio frequencies.

In the heat measuring field we have been working to extend the

standards for temperature measurements both for the very high and

the very low temperatures. During the past year we have put into

operation equipment and techniques for temperature measurements

within a few thousandths of a degree of absolute zero. Standards for color measurement provide an important and in- teresting field of investigation. Quite recently we provided a new set of improved color standards for the petroleum refining industry in an area where we had formerly been dependent on rather unsatisfactory standards which had to be imported from other countries.

Even in the older and more familiar standards areas, such as length and mass measurements, we are continually striving to improve the accuracy with which calibrations can be carried out. Last

year I told you of work leading to the possible adoption of an optical
standard for length measurement. This fall there will be an important

international meeting in Paris to ascertain some of the possibilities of

this approach to a new international standard. In mass measurement

there is a pressing need in many fields of science to have means of

reliably weighing minute quantities of materials. We have developed

a set of microweight standards with which masses of a millionth of a gram can be detected.

In order for the Bureau to carry out its work in developing new

standards and improving old ones, it is necessary to conduct a strongbasic research program. This program provides fundamental in- formation on the properties of materials and methods of measurement

from which the new standards and calibration techniques can be

derived. Although the Bureau's initial primary purpose is the

development and maintenance of the standards for physical measure- ment and the determination of physical constants and properties of materials, we have several additional important and substantial activities. These include the development of methods of testing materials, mechanisms and structures as well as conducting tests on

such things for other Government agencies; the development of standards of practice, codes and specifications; the development of devices to serve special needs of other Government agencies; and the

rendering of scientific and technical advisory services to other Government agencies. The bulk of the Bureau's current activities now falls in these latter categories.

Much of this work is classified security information and so it should not be discussed. I would, however, like to refer briefly to a few achievements in the non-standards field. Some very notable

advances have been made in the field of semiconductor research.

This is the area from whence that fascinating new tool, the transistor, stems. You have probably all read a great deal about this tiny

device made of germanium which will do many of the jobs which

ordinary radio tubes do and may ultimately lead to a widescale

replacement of such tubes in the electronics industry. Since the

transistor is very tiny and consumes minute quantities of power, the

implications of this impending development are considerable.

There are, however, many difficulties in the further development and

utilization of the transistor. The germanium has to be so carefully

refined and treated that this may impose a serious limitation on the

ultimate utilization of transistors. In our laboratories we have found

that semiconducting materials with rectifying and transistor-like

properties can be obtained from combinations of other metals,

particularly combinations of indium and antimony. The possibilities of this type of development are very considerable since it opens up a wide range of new materials with interesting and perhaps

better properties for possible utilization in electronics.

A new process for plating nickel was developed by the Bureau and is now being offered to commercial users by industry. Basic patents were issued to National Bureau of Standards chemists and assigned

to the Secretary of Commerce. This process does not use an electrical current but depends entirely on chemical action. Coatings of

uniform thickness can be applied to the insides of tubes and tanks,

and in corners and sharp angles which are very difficult to cover by

the usual electroplating techniques. A number of industrial organizations are now exploring extensively its commercial possibilities

and its large-scale utilization. 5
Related closely to this, the Bureau has also developed a novel

method of electroforming aluminum. This is particularly important

for application to such things as waveguides which are used in the

radar and microwave radio field. Another NBS achievement has stemmed from its work on a major

installation on Cheyenne Mountain, Colorado. There we have a number of transmitters located on a peak which rises abruptly above

the Colorado plains. East of the mountain are a series of radio

receiving stations extending as far as Arkansas. In observations taken

from this set-up we are accumulating much new and important infor- mation on the characteristics of the propagation of radio waves in the very high frequency and ultrahigh frequency range. These are the frequency ranges which are used in your FM radio and television

transmitters and receivers.

At the National Bureau of Standards we are very much concerned

with the development of new and improved instruments, since instruments are the devices by which we study the properties of materials

and by which we make calibrations. A notable instrument achievement from our laboratories in the past year was the development of a new type of ultrasonic flowmeter. Much work has been done over many years to measure the flow of liquids and gases through a variety

of media. The new XBS method consists of directing sound waves

through the flowing fluid and receiving the sound waves a short dis- tance along the flow path with a barium titanate receiver. A barium

titanate transmitter is also used to generate the sound waves. By

rapidly converting the transmitter to a receiver and vice versa we can measure a change in velocity of the propagation of sound due to the

velocity of flow of the liquid. This change' in velocity provides an

accurate measure of the flow of a fluid. Furthermore, it is not neces- sary to disturb the flow of the fluid by inserting an obstruction into

the stream. The barium titanate transducers need not make direct

contact with the fluid. It appears that this technique may have considerable utilization not only in the physical sciences but also in the

biological sciences. Physiologists are interested in using this technique to study the properties of the flow of blood since with this instrument one can measure the velocit}' of flow in arteries and veins

without penetrating them.

Last year I told you about the very successful operation of our large

automatic high-speed digital computing machine. This was put into

operation just about three years ago and for the past two and one-half

years it has been on a 24-hour day, seven days per week schedule,

solving a variety of problems of considerable importance to defense

agencies and also for a number of basic research investigations.

During the past year we have had regularly scheduled operation on

another computing machine in our mathematical laboratories at the

University of California at Los Angeles. The machine here at Washington is called SEAC, meaning Standards Eastern Automatic Computer; the one at Los Angeles is called the SWAC, meaning Standards

Western Automatic Computer. When you visit our laboratories

tomorrow, I think vou will have an opportunitv to see and inspect our SEAC.

Another type of relatively novel activit}" for a physical science

laboratory is the utilization of modern statistical techniques in the

design of experiments. We have a very strong statistical engineering

laboratory. This staff is assisting us in many of the operations

6
throughout the Bureau, enabling us to get more and better data with

less effort. The members of this statistical laboratory are very much

concerned with some of the activities of interest to the members of

this Conference and undoubtedly they have ideas, suggestions, and

techniques which would be helpful to you in many of your operations.

Although the examples just given are but a small part of the total

activities of the Bureau. I hope they are sufficient to give some illus- tration of the nature of our achievements during the past year. You may be interested in a brief reference to the so-called vital

statistics. Our total budgetary operation is at about a $50,000,000

annual level. This is substantially what it was when I reported to you

last year. This total budget includes 85 percent which comes to us from other agencies of the Government in payment for jobs which

they want us to do for them. The remaining 15 percent, or around

SS. 000, 000. is provided directly to us by the Congress for our basic

activities. Our current staff totals about 4,800. This represents an

increase of about 300 over a year ago and this increase is mainly in our field stations and represents an effort to staff to the level requested

by the defense agencies. About 4.000 of our staff are working here in Washington. The other 800 are in our field stations, the largest one

being at Corona. California, which is about 50 miles east of Los

Angeles. There we are doing work in applied electronics for the

Department of Defense.

Last year I told you that we were getting ready to start construction of a major radio laboratory in Boulder. Colorado. Construction

of this laboratory, which will cost about 84.000.000. started last July

and it is expected that it will be ready for occupancy about next March. Probably at this time next year the Bureau will be in the

process of moving a substantial part of its radio engineering staff to that location.

Members of this conference are probably interested in the testing

and calibration activities of the National Bureau of Standards.

During the past fiscal year we completed over 800.000 individual tests and calibrations. Most of these were carried out for other Government agencies in connection with Government procurement, the

largest single item being the sample testing of cement purchased by

the Government. On this project we sampled some 15.000.000 barrels

of cement and made tests from the samples selected. Other representative examples of our testing and calibration services

include tests on 4.500 light bulbs in connection with Government

procurement and the calibration of 8.900 gage blocks. The latter were primarily for industry. Here it is interesting to point out that

the gage block provides a basis for our mass production industry

since these gages are used to insure the accuracy of dimensions neces- sary for the interchangeability of component parts. We also carried out over 1.800 calibrations on radioactive materials. Included in

this were calibrations on about 860 radon samples taken from workers

in radioactive plants. In addition. Ave distributed to other laboratories

both in industries and universities some 33.000 standard samples.

These are the materials whose accurately known chemical or physical

properties provide a reference for control purposes in industrial

operations.

Finally. I would like to report on some of the activities of the Office

of Weights and Measures where we have attempted to fulfill numerous

requests for assistance from members of this conference and others.

7
Following' the adoption of a resolution by the 37th National Conference

lasl year requesting the National Bureau of Standards to institute an

investigation of methods of determining truck axle loads, steps were

taken to initiate the work as quickly as possible in the hope that some

progress could be made during the following year. The first phase of the work, a survey of methods currently in use and under development, was undertaken. Members of our staff dis- cussed the problem in motion weighing of vehicles and visited the

installation for motion weighing on Shirley Highway in Virginia.

Arrangements are currently being made to inspect several commercial

installations and from these inspections and discussions by members

of our staff we hope to conclude shortly the survey part of this in- vestigation. Plans are now being made to increase our activities on

this program and to carry out jointly with the Bureau of Public

Roads and the trucking industry an active development program.

Since the 37th National Conference, we have lost the services of

David V. Smith, Railroad Track Scale Inspector, who, after over 27

years of faithful service, retired because of physical disability on December 30, 1952. On October 6 Allen A. Williams reported for duty as a trainee in the railway track scale program. Mr. Williams'

initial training was completed about a month ago, and he has been

placed in charge of our testing equipment No. 2. Both of our track

scale testing units now are operating on full-time schedules. Charles

H. Oakley is in charge of Unit No. 1. Each of the 19 master track

scales was calibrated at least once during the past year, and commercial track scales have been tested as time permitted. In many

instances we have been gratified by the cooperation of State and local weights and measures officials in this program. We feel sincerely

that considerable benefits to the Bureau, to the weights and measures

officials, and to scale owners can be derived from such cooperation.

The Bureau has had a representative present at every State and

Regional annual conference of weights and measures officials during

the past year. Through these meetings we are able to maintain

contact with the State and local officials and to keep informed as to the activities, progress, and requirements of the many jurisdictions.

In addition we have made official visits to a number of State and

local offices. It is encouraging that improvement in weights and measures administration and enforcement throughout the Nation has continued

during this year. Many jurisdictions have obtained additional and

substantial testing equipment, and many States, counties, and cities have employed additional personnel. Legislative improvements have

been made in several of the States. Particular recognition goes to the State of Colorado where, on March

31, a comprehensive weights and measures law was signed by Governor

Dan Thornton. The Colorado enactment is essentially the same as Form II of the Model Law on Weights and Measures, which is rec- ommended by this Conference. We are very glad that Colorado is represented at this National Conference. I know all of you will want to become acquainted with the Colorado official who will be

introduced to you during the roll call of the States. An amendment to the Kansas Law was enacted. This amendment includes most of the package commodity sections of the Model

Law.

8
The progress of the States in adopting the specifications, tolerances,

and regulations for commercial weighing and measuring devices, as recommended by the National Conference and as published in NBS

Handbook 44, has continued and is encouraging. Since the last Conference, four States have officially adopted these codes by promulgation and one by legislative enactment. These five States are Idaho, Illinois, New Hampshire, Washington, and Wisconsin.

Twenty-one other States previously have adopted these requirements—they are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas,

Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New

Jersey, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas,

Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming. This brings the

number of States that have promulgated these provisions to 26, and

leaves only 22 States and the District of Columbia that have not

revised their codes since Handbook 44 was published in 1949. We

hope that progress in this regard will continue and that these 22

States will join the effort toward uniformity.

The State of New Hampshire has promulgated another recommendation of this Conference. That is the Model Regulation for Package

Marking Requirements, which was tentatively adopted by the Conference last year. Two publications of importance to all weights and measures offi- cials and to allied commercial interests have been issued by the

Bureau since the 37th Conference. The Report of the 37th National

Conference became available during April of -this year, as NBS

Miscellaneous Publication 206. All of those who registered at the

37th Conference have been sent copies of this report.

A major publication, which has been planned for many years, is now available for distribution. It is the Weights and Measures Case

Reference Book, designated NBS Circular 540. A few copies are

available at the registration desk for your inspection. This document can be purchased for $1.25 from the Superintendent of Documents.

As the title implies, the case reference book is intended as an index

to and digest of weights and measures decisions of record. The material is presented in lay language and furnishes condensed legal principles as expounded by the Courts. Weights and measures officials should find this new publication useful as a field manual. Information on any specific item in the book may be found through the comprehensive index. The case reference book was designed and composed as a ready guide to decisions cognate to certain definite and

specific situations in weights and measures administration and en- forcement. This new publication, used in conjunction with NBS

Circular 501, "Federal and State Weights and Measures Laws," will furnish the official with extensive information in this field. On the inside back cover of the program of this Conference you

will find listed a number of weights and measures documents published by the National Bureau of Standards. These also are available

for your inspection at the registration desk, where they may be either

purchased directly or ordered for later delivery.

It is our desire to publish such material as is required by you, and

as will be of definite assistance to you. We solicit your recommendations to this effect. In order that we may continue to progress I would like to offer for your consideration and especially for the consideration of the various

269870—53 : 9
standing committees, a suggestion as to extending the activity and

effectiveness of these committees. The one additional component in possible committee activity which seems to be desirable is leadership

in bringing about official adoption by the several States of committee

recommendations. It is my belief that members of each standing

committee could furnish this leadership. For example, the standing

Committee on Legislation could study the various State laws, suggest

amendments or revisions thereto, and work with the State administrators towards successful enactment of Conference recommendations.

The Specifications and Tolerances Committee could increase its activity

toward the encouragement of adoption by the States of the requirements recommended by the Conference. The Committee on Methods

of Sale of Commodities could follow its recommendations to successful

promulgation and enforcement in the several States. Activity of this nature would extend the benefits of committee research and

recommendations

.

In closing I extend to each of you an invitation to call freely on the

National Bureau of Standards for assistance in the solution of your

technical problems. We know that your work is of fundamental

importance to the stability and strength of the Nation's commerce.

Therefore, we are at your service. Please accept my sincere wishes

for both profitable and enjoyable sessions during this 38th National

Conference on Weights and Measures.

REMARKS OF J. W. SAYBOLT, BUSINESS COUNSELLOR ON WEIGHTS

AND MEASURES

I wish to make just a comment or two which express my own

thoughts and which I believe will be concurred in by practically

everyone in this group.

Mr. President, I was first introduced to the activities of the weights

and measures group in 1924 and at that time began a realization of the very deep importance and value of weights and measures work to the consumer, the seller, the manufacturer, the buyer, and to civiliza- tion as a whole, and I have endeavored in the 29 years following that

date to add in a small way my efforts to publicizing, on the positive

side, the value of the work of this organization.

The point which has appealed to me for a considerable length of time, for years, is the deep value to those who administer weights and

measures to have the supreme—I use the word objectively—the

supreme guidance of the intelligence, technical knowledge, understanding and loyalty of those gentlemen in the National Bureau of Standards. It is a matter of gratification to us that the Department

of Commerce, represented by Mr. Sheaffer, and the Bureau, repre- sented by its Director, guide and lead us in an intelligent propagation

and formation of laws and regulations for the conduct of this work.

Custom over the years has indicated that the Director of the

Bureau does not only become ex officio, but officially by elective action,

President of this association. As this group carries on its work it is our hope that that situation will remain unchanged, and may I add

in conclusion, Dr. Astin, that it is our hope that you will remain as President for many, many years to come.

10
APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES

(The President made the following committee appointments:)

COMMITTEES SERVING DURING THE 38TH NATIONAL CONFERENCE

Committee on Nominations: C. A. Baker, New York, Chairman;

Xalls Berryman, Florida; E. R. Fisher, Rhode Island; J. T. Kennedy,

District of Columbia; R. S. Ackerman, Minneapolis, Minn.; C. M.

Fuller, Los Angeles County, Calif.; Tom Webb, Nashville, Tenn.

Committee on Resolutions: J. E. Mahoney, Maryland, Chairman;

C. D. Baucom, North Carolina; M. O. Nickon, Dearborn, Mich.;

J. M. O'Neil, Cambridge, Mass.; A. 0. Oslund, Union City, N. J.; W. H. Roberts, Vigo County, Ind.; J. C. Goll, N. Dak.

STANDING COMMITTEES

Committee on Legislation : Nails Berryman, Florida, 5-year term, to succeed C. A. Baker, New York, whose term expired.

Committee om Methods of Sale of Commodities: E. C. Westwood,

Salt Lake City, L'tah, 5-year term, to succeed I. M. Levy, Chicago,

111., whose term expired.

Committee on Specifications and Tolerances: R. D. Thompson,

Virginia, 5-year term, to succeed J. P. McBride, Massachusetts,

whose term expired.

Committee on Trading by Weight: G. L. Johnson, Kentucky, 2-year

term, to succeed J. J. Levitt, Illinois, who retired and T. C. Beck,

Oklahoma, 5-year term, to succeed J. H. Meek, Virginia, whose term

expired.

Committee on Weights and Measures Education: C. A. Lyon, New

Hampshire, 5-year term, to succeed J. T. Kennedy, District of Columbia, whose term expired.

HONORARY LIFE MEMBERSHIP CARD PRESENTED TO RALPH W.

SMITH

Mr. Louis E. Witt: Last year the Thirty-seventh' National Conference on Weights and Measures elected one of its prominent and

longtime members to honorary life membership. This action was

without precedent in the annals of the Conference, but the unusual

award was conferred upon a distinguished and outstanding weights

and measures man, Ralph W. Smith.

Mr. Smith's distinguished service to the National Conference on

Weights and Measures and his lasting contributions to this body and

to the weights and measures movement in general need not be re- counted at this time since these things are well known to all present.

I am privileged to present to you. Mr. Smith, this engraved gold

card, authorized by the Executive Committee, as evidence of your

honorary life membership in the National Conference on Weights and

Measures.

(Mr. Smith responded and expressed his appreciation for the honor so bestowed.)

ROLL CALL OF STATES

The Chairman called the roll of States. Delegates from 39 States and the District of Columbia responded. Delegates and their ladies were introduced individually.

11
ROLL CALL OF STATE AND REGIONAL WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

ASSOCIATIONS

The Chairman called the roll of State and Regional Associations of Weights and Measures Officials. Representatives of all 19 Associations on record responded.

(Written reports from many States and Associations were duplicated and

distributed at the Conference.)

(The Conference was recessed until 2 p. m.)

SECOND SESSION—AFTERNOON OF TUESDAY, MAY 19, 1953

(R. D. Thompson, Vice President, presiding)

PREPACKAGED FOODS

By G. F. Austin, Jr., Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures, Detroit, Michigan

The importance of check-weighing or check-measuring packages of commodities, which are put up by the packer or merchant in advance

of sale, is one phase of our activities, as weights and measures officials,

which scarcely can be overestimated. It is true that much of this work is being done ; however, it is also evident that many weights and

measures officials pay very little attention to factory-filled packages

of nationally advertised commodities. Perhaps the main reason for

this is the somewhat perplexing problem which might arise as to how

to obtain the necessary tare weights of the packages to facilitate the

procedure. That is one of the things I will discuss.

It would seem that the initial approach to this subject should be

to relate and put emphasis on one basic and pertinent fact. That

fact is, in every jurisdiction throughout the country, there are literally

thousands of manufacturers and packers of various types of commodities who, for one reason or other, are not included in the regular

routine inspection itinerary of weights and measures departments.

Mainly, this situation can be attributed to the very limited personnel

to be found in most departments whose present numerous and important duties preclude doing extensive work in this particular field. However, it is somewhat obvious that, if each of us did take more

time, we could cover this neglected field more efficiently and more

economically than is the case presently. Actually, we would find

dividends resulting therefrom. In supervising this matter at the

source, we would find more adequate facilities and means for determining the tare weights for various packages. More packages could

be examined with less effort and in shorter time. Then, too, each

manufacturer or packer would be alerted more fully and frequently

to any irregularities and to their responsibilities, insofar as weights

and measures requirements are concerned. A united effort, using

this approach to the problem, demands full consideration by each

and every one of us. Remember that, if all departments cooperated

effectively in this matter, we would not have to resort entirety to the more difficult way of accomplishing the desired end.

One field testing procedure involves an extremely laborious effort , to obtain the vital preliminary information relative to the tare weights

of millions of packages. In Detroit, we resort to both of these apJ proaches and we do make a real effort in both directions.

When we plan to inspect manufacturers' packages in the retail stores, we start our preparations months in advance by collecting a ! 12
widespread assortment of cans, bottles, paper containers, etc. We

obtain at least six or more containers of each commodity. The

containers, when emptied, are used to establish an average tare schedule. Next, and of extreme importance, when we collect these

containers and before establishing a mean or average weight of same, we make sure that each container is complete in every detail; that is, containers should be complete with closures; labels should be complete; the containers thoroughly cleaned, etc. Proceeding from this point, consideration must be given to the

material of which these containers are made. The metal containers

lend themselves to the establishment of a mean tare weight, as do the

paper containers. However, you will find that the glass containers'

weights vary slightly more. These variations are not sufficient to invalidate their use for the checking purposes. Keep in mind that

this type of survey should be predicated in most respects on the average, rather than on the individual unit weights. When you have

established the list of mean tare weights for each of the containers on which you are able to get advance information, you then are ready

to go into the field to make the survey.

As a starting point, in instances where the manufacturer or packer

is not located in your jurisdiction, the most desirable place would be

in the warehouses of the wholesale grocer or the chain store operator.

There you are most likely to find an abundance of the commodities

for which you already have an established list of mean tare weights.

Ordinarily, you will find these people very cooperative and interested

in your program, and manjr times they extend their interest to the

point of opening up packages of commodities other than those you

have on your prepared list, thereby enlarging the scope of your initial program and providing you with additional mean tare weights.

For the purpose of this survey, the use of an over-and-under type

scale with Ke-oz graduations on the chart is recommended. Another

suggestion would be to have some specially-prepared report forms for

this type work, similar to figure 1. This form contains columns for such information as name of commodity, trade name, name of manufacturer, content statement, weight of container, whether the container is made of glass, tin, cardboard or paper, place of inspection,

and also a column to indicate whether the content statement is correct

as to form. From time to time, vou may find it desirable to take vour

SIZE OF

CONTAINER OD in inches

CON- TENT

STATE- MENT

Figure 1. 13
over and under reading from the chart in the units of }{& oz, % oz, or % oz; so, for the purpose of recording such information, a space is provided at the extreme left-hand side. The need for the use of one

or the other of these units is predicated principally on the utility of such information when computing the average weights of the packages.

Directly opposite this space, there are three lines provided to record

the variable for each unit checked. One line "A" for the approved, one line "O" for those overweight, and one line "S" for those that

are short weight. At the far end of these lines, you will find a column

to indicate the number of units checked in each of the categories,

"Approved," "Over," and "Short." The end space is also used to record the "average" finding on those particular packages. One

column, you will observe, is headed "G," "T," "C." These letters were used for the sake of brevity. They represent the material of

which a particular container is made—glass, tin, and cardboard or

paper, respectively.

In addition to this phase of our special program activities relating

to prepackaged merchandise, there are five other principal phases:

The checking of prepackaged meats, frozen foods, wholesale meat deliveries, wholesale packages of fruit and vegetables, and packaged milk in cartons. The prepackaged meat problem, like that of frozen foods, is of fairly recent vintage, dating back but a few years. It is interesting to

recall that, in the early stages of this development, when prepackaged

meats were making their bow, the industry made great demands for shrinkage tolerances. In the course of events that followed, a poll was taken on this subject by a weights and measures official. The

replies definitely indicated that all city and by far the majority of State and county weights and measures officials were opposed to the

establishment of such tolerances. In addition, supporting our general

idea in this matter, we were fortunate in having a representative from

the National Association of Retail Grocers address our 35th National

Conference. This man made the following remarks in the course

of his talk

:

Most of you in session here are quite naturally interested in prepackaged

perishables from your own perspective of weights and measures. While

I realize that I am "sticking my neck out" by dealing with this phase of a subject on which you are so well informed, nevertheless I am going to air some of my views and reveal certain weaknesses prevalent under this new

method of packaging. May I say in advance, however, that, while our

store has its own share of problems, prepackaging and otherwise, the follow- ing are not among them:

(1) Short weight and overcharging.—The "bugaboos" can be largely over- come by first fixing prices a cent or two per pound higher and allowing }i oz. for shrinkage, provided needs beyond two days are not anticipated.

(2) Tare allowance.—Some merchants apparently overlook the fact that j only the net contents can be priced to the consumer. They should be reminded otherwise.

(3) Proper refrigeration of smoked meats.—There is a tendency to display

these atop the case or in mass floor displays, with a resultant shrinkage of 10 percent or more in a matter of days. This practice should be discouraged. ,

j All smoked meats except those of old cure should be kept under refrigeration.

These announced opinions represent some of the early answers J to the frantic demands of industry for shrinkage tolerances. Time

jj has proved this was not the real answer to the situation. Since then, t as you no doubt have observed, great forward strides have been H

made by the packers of these commodities. They have eliminated

most of the difficulties which were present at the beginning of this a

14
enterprise. Today, with the use of new and improved packaging materials, with improved packaging know-how, and the continued

improvement being made in refrigerated self-service display equipment, they seem to have the situation fairly well in hand. Other

progressive steps which contributed to this improvement were the

advent of the special prepackaging scales, selecting people to do the

scaling on the basis of their greater aptitude for this type of work,

and the special training given the people to prepare them for the job.

For recording this type *of work, we recommend a form similar to figure 2.

Correct Mkd. Wt. Marked Weight Correct Short Over

Lbs. Ozs. Price Lbs. Ozs. Price Wt. Money Wt. Money

i—r~r

Figure 2. With the weight problem fairly well out of the way, the matter

of proper labeling them became a controversial issue. At first, most

all labeling indicated only the net weight and the total price of the

package. This did not provide the purchaser with a ready answer as

to how much he was paying per pound. Fundamentally, at least, this was not a weight or measure problem, but, inasmuch as it was

closely allied to the subject of consumer protection, much was made

of it in our circles, with the result that some jurisdictions developed new laws and regulations which required, in addition to the net weight

and total price, the price per pound quotation. Now, with laws or no laws to this effect, the industry generally has adopted this form of

labeling. In addition, these labels usually carry a code which shows the

day of the week the package was prepared. This information helps

the merchant maintain a better control over the weight situation.

The method used by weights and measures inspectors to checkweigh this type of merchandise varies somewhat in different jurisdictions. For the most part, nearly all demand that the average net weight be correct, allowing in some instances a variation of }% or }{ oz. plus or minus on an individual package. This seems reasonable.

There is a controversial point which might bear some discussion.

That is the question of whether to use a duplicate dry container as a counterblance for the wrappings or the wrapping of the particular

package, which may be saturated in one degree or other with the

natural moisture which has separated from the commodity. It seems

that the latter, procedure should be adhered to, for the reason that, if we did not employ this method, the door would be left wide open for packers of dried fruits, beans, etc., to claim the same advantage.

They, too, have a similar problem. This inevitably would terminate

into a chaotic situation.

15
Other problems in this same field are meats and poultry in cans. This matter, which borders on the subject of short weight, frequently

is brought to our attention, and, here, reference is made to the volume

of liquid, in the form of gravy or meat juices contained in such

packages, and included in the net content declaration. This particular matter was discussed on a limited basis at one of our previous

Conferences, and a statement was made by Mr. Queen of the Food

and Drug Administration as follows

:

No regulations have been promulgated under the Federal Act stipulating allowances that will be made in the "labeled weight and the actual drained

chicken weight on whole chicken" in which a liquid substance has been used

as a packing medium. We would regard the use of an excessive amount

of such a packing medium in canned whole chickens as an adulteration and

amenable to the general adulteration provision of the Federal Act. ... In the case of whole chicken in gravy, when labeled as such, we would not object to a declaration of the combined weight of the chicken and gravy as the net weight of the packaged product. Such a product would, of course, be subject to the considerations noted above in respect to adulteration. In accordance with Food Inspection Decision 144, issued May 11, 1912, we

hold that the chicken should, as nearly as is practical, fill the container, and

that the gravy should occupy only the space that would otherwise be unfilled. Problems of this kind, no doubt, will plague us for some time, but

this mention is made of the canned meats and poultry simply to

illustrate one of the many complicated situations prevalent in con- nection with the prepackaging .of foodstuffs. In this respect, it is hoped that the development of closer controls will make for consid- \ erable improvement and thereby lessen this particular difficult}^. , Frozen foods, in many respects, also need our close supervision, and,

with the cooperation of the Food and Drug Administration, it is quite likely that most of these varied problems will be diminished I considerably.

The check-weighing of wholesale meat deliveries is done in the I shipping rooms of the packers and jobbers, and, in addition, on deliveries being made from deliveiy trucks which have established

routes. Much of this weighing is done on the customer's scales at ! time of sale. Fresh fruits and vegetables in bags, crates, and boxes are check- 9 weighed at the large fruit and vegetable terminals, and also in the J warehouses of the large grocery outlets. For this purpose, we have I a five-foot folding tripod with detachable lifting arm having a leverj age ratio of 3 to 1, a 100-pound, }{ pound-graduation, dial scale with

a hook attached, and a few feet of rope. Packaged milk in cartons also receives our close attention. We I have devised a rather unique procedure by which to handle this matter, which will be brought to your attention later in the program,

when another speaker will present a paper on the subject.

The percentage of time allotted to any of the various phases of our

special project investigational work depends principally on the conditions which we find to prevail from time to time.

In the course of this talk, I have attempted to cover the whole

field of prepackaged commodities. Now, and in conclusion, I would

like again to focus your thoughts on one of the initial items, the

matter of the factory-filled packages of nationally advertised commodities, by taking the liberty of repeating what I term to be the

quintessence of this subject ; namely, if each of us did take more time

in the check-weighing and check-measuring of manufacturers' p'ack- i

16
aged commodities in the factories or packing plants, we could save

! an enormous amount of time and trouble, and indirectly accomplish

this Herculean task more efficiently and economically.

Mr. Mundy: In my jurisdiction we find it most difficult to determine the tare weight of any particular package without opening the

package and thus reducing the profit of the merchant whose establishment we are checking. I feel that our attention should be focused

upon some definite policy with regard to tare weights of containers

and that this policy should be recommended by this Conference.

In Virginia, one of our problems concerns smoked meats. I believe that hams and bacons should be packed in cases and that the

tare weights should be indicated on the outside of such cases. Mr. J. M. Galloway: In Indiana,. our greatest problem seems to be items packaged at the retail store. Much of this difficulty is caused

by the large turnover of labor in these retail outlets. I believe one

solution to the retail problem would be an extensive educational and

training program, participated in by all personnel who actually pre- pack and label food items.

Mr. Thomas: All weights and measures men are very much in- terested in this problem. Since it is a matter of concern to all of us,

I believe a general discussion on methods of procedure would be

beneficial. Mr. Mundy: In the City of Richmond we endeavor to checkweigh prepackaged goods in a comprehensive manner; in fact, during

the past year we weighed more than 73,000 packages of merchandise.

We have discovered that a merchant cannot prepackage goods adequately and accurately on a conventional computing scale. Our

method of operation in this field includes the weighing of the items,

the finding of the tare weights, and the proving of the net contents. Mr. Slough: We must realize that the average super market has

from 50 to 80 thousand packaged items in the store. Many of these

items are not packaged locally and those too should be checked.

One method of operation under a limited budget would include the

careful weighing—gross, tare, net—of every food item purchased for consumption by weights and measures officers and their families.

A department employing six people would cover the field fairly well

during 1 year. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TRADING BY WEIGHT, PRESENTED BY

J. FRED TRUE, CHAIRMAN

Your Committee on Trading by Weight has made a survey of the

States to try to find out how much interest and how much opposition

there is in the trading by weight movement. We find that a number

of States have no interest in a change, also that a number of States have been on a weight basis for several years. A number of items

which have a legal weight per bushel are always weighed, and the

term bushel is used to indicate a given amount of weight. There are some items which actually are sold by the bushel measure. In these

cases, the bushel is used as a measure. We sent a letter to each State inquiring about the interest in their

jurisdiction, also asking them to check the legal weights of a number

of items, such as the farm grains, which move in volume. We made

no attempt to check every item, because some of the items are not

important to most of the States,

17
The following quotation is from the Agriculture Research Administration of the United States Department of Agriculture, Washington,

D. C:

Unit of Measure. In the interest of economy and greater uniformity in the handling of grain, an effort should be made to measure the merits and

evaluate the problems involved in shifting trade in grain from "bushels" to 100-pound units. The investigation should include a study of legal obstacles, institutional changes, and statistical data adjustments required in event such change was instituted. Following are statements received from various States: Alabama: There is a definite trend in Alabama to get away from the bushel and use weight instead. The majority of sales and a considerable number of the quotations on the products shown on your list are by weight

instead of the bushel. When the bushel is abandoned entirely and weight

alone employed, it will be much better for all of us, as there are quite a few

varying weights per bushel among the States. Arizona: In reply to your letter of March 12, the State of Arizona uses weight instead of dry measure in the sale of all commodities.

California: The California law provided for weights per bushel for the

following: flax seed, oats, rye, wheat, Indian corn (shelled), barley, and

buckwheat.

Georgia: You ask in your letter if there was a move in Georgia to do away

with the bushel measure and use weight instead. If there has been any move

to this effect, it has not been brought to my attention. Idaho: The State of Idaho already has done away with the bushel measure and uses the weight system entirely. Illinois: There seems to be no interest in our State to do away with the bushel and use weight instead. Indiana: I do not believe there is much widespread interest in Indiana

to do away with the established weight per bushel. About the only exception

would be in the case of ear corn. Grain dealers frequently express the opinion

they would like to see this provision eliminated from the law and that all sales be made on the basis of hundredweight. For some reason or other, they have not introduced a bill, to my knowledge, which would repeal the weight-per-bushel provisions for ear corn. There is nothing in our law which prevents the buying and selling of commodities, for which bushel weights have been established, on a hundredweight basis. In fact, many of the commodities listed are now sold on a hundredweight basis. Notable among these are corn meal, middlings, salt, etc. In some sections of the State ear corn is being bought and sold on a hundredweight basis. Louisiana: In reply to your letter of March 12, regarding the bushel or dry measures in this State, beg to state that with a very few exceptions practically all commodities are sold by weight.

Maine: At the present time, as far as we know, there is no effort to do

away with the weight by bushel in this State. Maryland : This is to advise that the legal weight per bushel of the various commodities were repealed when the new weights and measures law was

enacted by the General Assembly in 1950. Such legal weights were not

re-enacted. Massachusetts: Our law provides that all fruits, nuts, vegetables, and

grain shall be sold at retail by avoirdupois weight or numerical count unless the same are contained in original standard containers. Michigan: Your letter of March 12 asked, "Is there any interest in your

State to do away with the bushel and use weight instead?". Speaking for Michigan, there is some sentiment for selling such commodities by weight

instead of by the bushel. I think it would be a very desirable objective for our Conference. Minnesota: In reply to your inquiry relative to any movement or interest displayed in Minnesota to sell by weight in place of volume, the answer is in the affirmative. The enclosed bushel list is indicative of this fact. All commodities appearing on this list must be sold by. weight when bushel reference is made. For

example, if one were to purchase a bushel of potatoes, there must be sixty (60) pounds delivered; of tomatoes, the weight shall be fifty (50) pounds.

18
It follows then, that insofar as reference to the bushel or fraction thereof, the weight as given on the bushel list must prevail; therefore, the bushel has

lost its identity and said commodities must be sold by weight.

New Hampshire: I am definitely in favor of doing away with the bushel and selling entirely by weight.

New Jersey: With the exception of certain seeds, New Jersey long ago abandoned the use of dry measures for quantity determinations in relation

to fruit and vegetable commodities.

New York: Formerly Section 190 of the New York State law set up a list of weights per bushel for a number of commodities, but in 1939 this Section was repealed and a new Section 190 was enacted which reads.

Sec. 190. Sales of fruits, vegetables, grains and nuts. Except when

sold in the original container, fruits, vegetables, grains and nuts shall be

sold at retail by avoirdupois weight or numerical count. Nevada: * * * dry measure, such as bushel, peck, etc., is not or never has been used as a basis of measurement in the sale of any commodities, to my

knowledge. In lieu thereof, such products are sold by weight, or in some

cases, numerical count. Ohio: You may be interested in knowing that the Sealers' Association is sponsoring a Bill which would delete the weight per bushel of ear corn and

corn meal. We would like to have gone further and included wheat and oats but the

grain industry feels that the custom of buying and selling by the bushel of these two grains is still too imbedded to make this change now. Oregox: As Oregon laws do not permit sale by bushel weights we are not returning 3-our mimeographed copy of legal weights.

Pennsylvania: I am very much interested in eliminating the use of dry measures in the State of Pennsylvania: however, up to the present time we

have not been able to have our laws changed to this effect. Until such time

as we can convince the General Assembly that this is the worst method of

sale for dry commodities, we must permit the use of dry measures. South Carolina: In reply to your question if any interest is being taken

in this State to abolish the bushel measure, we have given the matter some

consideration, but so far our General Assembly has not repealed this Section

of the law. Utah: Our weights and measures law does not establish legal weights per

bushel of any commodity.

Any commodity which is in an enclosed package is required to be labeled with the net weight in the package.

The bushel, however, is used a great deal in sale of fruit and vegetables, established by common practice for many years. I do not know of any

expressed interest toward doing away with the use of the bushel in this respect and replacing therefor the use of weight.

Virginia: I have your letter of March 12 in regard to the Committee on

Trading by "Weight, and hope that the Committee will be maintained. It seems to me we should work along the lines that we have been and develop new ways of bringing about these changes.

It might be beneficial if those in charge of the inspection of grains and

those in charge of weights and measures would cooperate in the formation

of an association to discuss the benefits of trading by weight. I am offering

this as a suggestion for your report.

I insist that a committee still continue to work on this matter, as I believe

it is a worthy cause, even though the ultimate objectives will take many

years. Vermont: With reference to your inquiry regarding interest shown in this State to the doing away with the so-called "dry measure," we have drifted away from the use of dry measure in nearly all transactions in this jurisdiction. Of course, the table of equivalent weights is used to some extent, but there is practically no use of dry measure as such. Washington: I have filled in a few items that are required in our State: however, the interest here is very keen to do away with the bushel and use weight instead. Wisconsin: There is no interest in this State to do away with bushel

weights at this time. However, I strongly suggest that we get away from

bushel weights on such items as apples, peaches, pears, etc., which are packed

in standard containers.

19
It does not appear logical that we require 44 pounds of apples in a standard

bushel when it is impossible to get this weight into the standard basket when

all varieties, sizes, and ages of apples are concerned. We recommend that the Committee be continued to give encouragement

and help to this movement wherever possible. Trading by weight has many

advantages. We feel that all State departments should encourage trading

in all commodities by weight.

Mr. Kalechman: I believe our first work in this direction should

be with the U. S. Government. Merchandise packed in a standard

bushel container must be sold as -a bushel, regardless of weight. In

tin 1 State of Connecticut if a bushel is packed in any other container, it must, of course, be sold by weight. I think that the U. S. Government should be asked to cooperate with this Conference

toward a goal of selling by weight only.

Mr.. True: A bushel by volume may weigh anything, depending

upon the commodity. Some States require that a bushel or basket of apples weigh 48 pounds. As you know, many times it is difficult to get 48 pounds of apples into a standard bushel container. In selling

by volume the method of packing is very important.

Mr. Blickley: Since different varieties of apples weigh differently,

it would be almost impossible to set a true weight per bushel for all varieties of apples.

Mr. Gray : The State of Nebraska has a law requiring 48 pounds

to the bushel for apples. I think many States have similar laws.

We found it difficult to enforce this requirement until we got a legal

opinion from our City Attorney that, regardless of the fact that the

apples were in a U. S. standard bushel marked "1 U. S. Standard

Bushel." the State requirement was not met unless the basket con- tained 48 pounds of apples. Based on this opinion we instituted

proceedings against one retailer and, after many hours of consultation

they agreed that they would stamp on each basket the minimum

weight of the apples contained.

(The Report of the Committee on Trading by Weight was adopted by the Conference.)

PRE-PACKAGED-ICE-CREAM MEASURE-CONTAINERS

By D. H. Williams, International Association of Ice Cream Manufacturers The matter of a weights and measures problem in the half-gallon

ice cream container became apparent about two years ago. At that

time, sealers of weights and measures found it very difficult to measure

the volumetric capacity of the half-gallon rectangular container due

to the variety of dimensions and the bulge in the face panels of these

containers found in commerce. In addition, it was found by subsequent displacement measurements tha t the actual volume of ice cream

in over 400 half-gallon packages tested from 119 to 129 cubic inches,

the liquid half gallon being 115.5 cubic inches. This variation in contents not only fell outside the tolerances of the proposed code,

but it contributed to a texture quality defect in the ice cream caused

by the container's distortion inducing overrun variations.

At the 36th National Conference on Weights and Measures a reso- lution was passed, as you recall, that this carton, a measure-container,

should be filled without apparent distortion. A distortion problem

J was created by the inherent properties of container design which

allowed a natural bulge in the face panels of the container.

20
The Simplified Practice Committee of the International Association

i of Ice Cream Manufacturers and representatives of the Paraffined

Carton Association went to work to see what could be done to resolve

this distortion factor . It should be made clear at the outset that this problem was investigated jointly by the three interests, the ice cream

industry, the carton industry, and the National Conference through

its Committee on Specifications and Tolerances. Basically, the half- gallon container was an industry problem, to be worked out by the

industries involved, with the assistance of the National Conference,

i The approach was a lengthy series of displacement tests. Half-gallon

| containers, filled with hardened ice cream, were immersed in cold

brine and the displacement measured volumetrically. This displacement procedure, while recognized by Official and Tentative Methods

of Analysis of the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists, was

not acceptable to weights and measures officials, since it was not

adaptable for use by sealers in the field. Our problem then was two-fold. We had to develop a test which

regulatory people could use under field conditions to determine ac- curately the volumetric contents of the container, and carton dimen-

; sions would have to be agreed upon wdiich would provide a tolerance

for the degree of bulge in the face panels. A later development, with

1 which you are not so directly concerned but which facilitates your

,j work nevertheless, was the standardization of container sizes to a limited number. The latter phase of the work has progressed to the

point where the Commodity Standards Division of the Department

of Commerce has distributed a proposed Simplified Practice Recommendation for two styles only of rectangular half-gallon containers.

Alread}', several hundred acceptances for this proposal have been

received from the industry, and the latest wwd received from the

Commodity Standards Division indicated that no disapprovals had

been received.

To return to the original problem, Mr. Holmes, and Dr. Skelton

of the Ice Cream Association devised a type of caliper instrument

with which they measured hundreds of assembled empty cartons to

j! determine the average bulge or distortion due to assembling the

carton. At this point conferences were held with the Specifications

and Tolerances Committee for their guidance and approval. Acting on their recommendation that these cartons be tested by filling with

( water while under support, a formula was developed which could be

used to determine the dimensions of a supporting collar or form that

would take into consideration a tolerance for normal distortion in

the container due to assembling. The formula agreed upon was that

| the inside dimension of the supporting form is based on center-ofscore to center-of-score measurement, plus two thicknesses of stock,

plus % 6 inch;

Using this formula, our industry committee made up sample cartons

!

| and proceeded to test them by filling with water. This procedure was adopted by the 37th National Conference last year and is w

rritten

! up and illustrated in the printed Report of the 37th National Coni ference which all of you have seen by now. Once the testing proj cedure was accepted, adjustments in carton height could be made so

1 that the volumetric contents fell within the tolerances prescribed in the Tentative Code for Pre-Packaged-Ice-Cream Measure-Containers.

These adjustments were made where necessary and the result, with

standardization as the ultimate objective, was the development of 21
the number 1 or "Squat" type and the number 2 or "Tall" type

rectangular half-gallon container. The dimensions of these two containers are, respectively:

No. 1. 3^X4%X64 %4 inches. No. .2. 3X5X7% inches. Both of these containers have a cubic capacity sufficient, under the

conditions of the test approved by the 37th National Conference, to

fall within the tolerances prescribed by the Conference, and published

as correction sheets to the National Bureau of Standards Handbook 44. The inside dimensions of the restraining forms for use with the two

styles of containers, if the containers are made of board having a thickness of 0.024 inch, are, respectively:

No. 1. 3

3 %4 X45 %4 X 4 inches. No. 2. 3%4 X5%4 X6 inches. Arrangements have been made by representatives of the Paraffined

- Carton Association to have the restraining forms fabricated and made

available to weights and measures officials who wish to purchase them.

Quotations for these forms are available from Mr. Raynor Holmes,

Bloomer Brothers Company, Newark, New York. Mr. Holmes is in

the room today and will be available for any questions you may wish

to direct to him either now or at the conclusion of the meeting.

In just a very brief summary I want to review the progress which was made in developing a satisfactory half-gallon rectangular ice- cream container.

1. Normal distortion, i. e., that due to assembly of the container, was determined.

2. A test procedure was agreed upon.

3. Formula was developed for the determination of the dimensions

of the supporting collar or form.

4. Container dimensions were determined from statistics taken from

the volumetric testing of hundreds of containers.

Finally, we have offered a standardization of two containers to the

industry. Individual acceptances from the ice cream and carton

industries, and weights and measures officials over the country are being received at the Department of Commerce today. As a result

of this work we feel that we have gone a very long way in assuring ! uniformity of contents and fair measure in the half-gallon rectangular

container.

(Mr. Holmes commented on the development and availability of restraining

forms to be used in testing pre-packaged-ice-cream measure-containers.)

PAPER MILK CONTAINERS

By D. M. Turnbull, Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures, Seattle, Washington

The typical weights and measures department of our average ] American community is confronted with a great variety of complex ; problems. Often, because of limited personnel, it is necessary to employ certain so-called short cuts in the field of supervision. The | weights and measures official must inspect the many and varied types

of weighing and measuring devices and must also maintain a constant

surveillance over the countless products that are packaged and sold

by weight or measure. He must, of necessity, devise methods of control by spot check that are both speedy and effective, as it would | 22
be patently impossible to inspect each individual commodity in his

jurisdiction.

Changes in American methods of merchandising quite often necessitate changes in our weights and measures approach. Years ago one would have believed that the milk bottle, long an institution, was an

; irreplaceable article in our daily living. Now, and with all indications

of staying, the paper container, or carton, is supplementing the bottle

in the delivery of milk. What no doubt has proved to be a vast improvement in the industry has at times presented a somewhat difficult problem to the weights and measures official. The transparent glass

milk bottle presented a comparatively minor problem, as all the

inspector had to do was see that each approved bottle was filled to the proper level—generally }i inch below the cap seat. Each bottle was, in effect, a liquid measure in itself; but, with the paper container,

;! a sealed unit, there is no "fill line." Thus the question: "How can

I determine whether this carton of milk contains full measure ?" This question has assumed national importance. Jurisdictions

throughout the country now are asking the same question and are trying to find a satisfactory method of constant measurement control

of this vast industry.

The gravimetric system is a practical answer to the problem of checking dairy products prepared and sold in paper containers. This

method simply establishes the weight of a commodity sold by liquid measure. Check-weighing is done in the field and has proved to be

an excellent means of control in our work in Seattle. When the

inspector goes into a grocery store for the purpose of checking the

computing scales, he can check-weigh a number of cartons of milk

quickly and thereby employ a constant supervision of the industry,

and still not spend an excessive amount of time in so doing.

We use the following sample form in recording the weights of each firm's products in the various sizes marketed:

Commodity Weight of Container

Liquid Test Measure and Slicker Net Weight

of Commodity

Gross Weight of Commodity

In the first column under "Commodity" we list each product in

its various sizes, and on our keenly-sensitive even-balance scales we

establish the weight of each size container, making sure to include the

! small tab used as an opening device by some manufacturers. We then

j weigh the liquid test measure and slicker plate by balancing off against accurate test weights on the opposite platter. The scale then

being in balance, we fill the test measure with the commodity involved

and again bring the scale to balance by adding weights to the other

platter, the amount of weight added being the net weight of the

23
commodity. The weight of the container and tab added to the net weight of the commodity gives us the gross weight to be used in the

field. This figure is checked once again by actually "balancing off "a

container holding the exact liquid measure against test weights. For

purposes of accuracy, all weights are determined very accurately.

However, in the field, merchants' scales often are used and when,

perhaps, it is not possible to read closer than a quarter ounce, we

find it satisfactory to read the scale plus or minus.

At this point it might be well to stress the importance of using

extreme care in the entire procedure of gravimetric checking. Precision

should be exercised in the process of determining the commodity

weights. The inspector must watch constantly for changes in design

or weight of the material used in the paper container. These changes

could be made by the manufacturer without notification. The maker

of the container conceivably could alter the weight of his product

using more or less wax in the coating which, by changing the tare weight, would change the gross weights arrived at by calculations in the laboratory.

The inspector also must be alert to recognize variations of butterfat content which would cause slight differences of weight in establishing his net commodity weights. He must also establish these weights

under constant temperature—taking into account expansion of the

butterfat content of the commodity he is weighing. Changes of this nature, if not recognized by the inspector, would make his method

of constant measurement control worthless.

Whenever it becomes necessary to correct discrepancies found in

the field through the courts, there is but one course to follow. The

product must be proved short liquid measure, weight no longer being

a factor. Evidence of short weight in a charge of short measure very

likely would not be admitted in the courts. In the event a large stock

of a certain dairy product was found exorbitantly short by gravimetric

check, a representative number of containers could be checked against

certified liquid measures. If this test bore out the gravimetric result,

the evidence doubtless would be admitted as proving the entire lot short measure. This case is comparable to a short weight delivery of

coal. The inspector can determine the cubic content of the bin and,

knowing the number of cubic feet in a ton of that particular coal, can come very close to computing the weight deficit. However, in presenting a case in court, the burden of proving short weight rests on the inspector. Obviously that would necessitate actually weighing

the coal in question.

The gravimetric sj^stem of check-weighing is a ready method of indicating a condition and as such has proved invaluable to the official in his effort to protect the buying public.

Mr. Saybolt: From a tolerance standpoint, it seems to me that

paper milk containers should be required to maintain the same degree

of accuracy as are glass milk bottles. Mr. Crawford: The only truly accurate way of determining the

quanity of contents in a paper milk container is through a volumetric

test.Mr. Howard: In Miami, Florida, we have found that we can control the volumetric content of paper milk containers by checkweighing

them. We have obtained the tare weights of the cartons from the

manufacturers and have determined the weight of the milk ourselves.

Mr. J. P. Leonard: I believe the place to control this problem is 24
lb. the plant where the containers are filled. One principal cause of

short measure is overspeeding the filling machine.

Mr. Arrandale: I would like to inquire as to the possibility of

r

i requiring and enforcing "fill line" provisions on paper milk containers.

Mr. Crawford: It would be impossible to put a mark on a con-

, tainer and enforce that mark as a fill line when such container is not

rigid and is not constructed to be a measure. Mr. Andre: I think our prime purpose is to see that the consumers

» get a full quart of milk. I would like to say for our company, and I

i think the paper container industry generally, that we are willing to operate within reasonable tolerances.

Mr. Kellogg: I believe milk cartons are filled at about 50° F.

5 I would like to know whether or not temperature changes are ac- counted for in these checking procedures.

Mr. Turnbtjll: Since the coefficient of expansion of butterfat is

3 only 0.00064, any expansion or contraction would be negligible.

Me. Walton: In Dallas, Texas, we have taken the attitude that

I the paper milk container is merely a container and that the machine

j itself is the measuring device. We have no specifications, tolerances,

or regulations dealing specifically with milk filling machines, but we

i j do consider them to be measuring devices and we endeavor to regulate

them accordingly. In the early history of milk in paper containers

i one of the greatest difficulties was caused by leaking cartons. That

i condition has been improved, and we now have very little trouble

L with short measure resulting from leaking cartons. We believe it is

i impossible to consider the paper container as a liquid measure. As

i you know, the carton bulges after it has contained milk for any length

of time.

We require that paper milk containers be properly labeled just as any other packaged food item.

Mr. Mundy: Mr. Walton, how do you handle a complaint from a housewife who claims that she has received short measure in a paper

milk container?

Mr. Walton: We make a volumetric check on the contents of the

i! carton in question. If a shortage is found, we determine the code on

the particular carton—a code which informs us as to the date that

that carton was filled. We then go to the retail outlets and endeavor

to locate other cartons with identical code. These cartons are checked

gravimetrically in the retail store. We check the cartons filled on the

particular day and also those filled the previous day and the day

following. If any shortage is found, we go directly to the creamer}^

and attempt to determine there what caused the shortage.

HIGHWAY TRUCK WEIGHING

By J. E. Nicholas, General Manager, Indiana Motor Truck Association,

Indianapolis, Indiana

I propose to put before you one of the trucking industry's greatest

problems of the present time. How can there be accurate and uniform weighing of trucks nationwide ? This is the problem of America's

I second largest industry, second only to agriculture, with one of ten

> pay checks now coming from the trucking industry. Trucks are

' moving 75 percent of the freight tonnage moved in this country.

Let's face the problem of highway truck weighing. In Indiana

j over 900,000 trucks are weighed annually by the State Police Depart269870—53 3 25
ment alone. Our State Police Department has adopted the best

known techniques for truck weighing through cooperation with our

Division of Weights and Measures and our Highway Department.

They have seen to it that State-owned platform scales were properly j installed in Indiana.

Overloaded vehicles are now running less than 0.8 percent and most \ of these violations are of minor axle-weight overloading resulting i from misloading, shifting of cargo, or error in scales at the point of loading where the vehicle was checked before going onto the highway. J We find that there are hundreds of commercial scales in our State ] where the approaches are not proper for multiple-draft weighing and i I am sure the same conditions that exist in our State exist in many j other States, and mind you—merchandise is bought and sold daily over these scales and every time a purchase or sale is made somebody

receives improper weight. These are the scales that grains, feeds. : and coal are bought and sold over day after day. And, these are

J the same scales, available in every communit}', that are often used j for checking motor vehicles before they go out on the highway. I We often find that even new scales installed for weighing trucks by the j

multiple-draft procedure are inaccurate.

It is time that uniform methods were adopted in the various

States for the weighing of motor trucks and more specifically—

multiple-draft weighing. Over the years standards for single-draft

j weighing have been established and well received. Research papers

j on multiple-draft weighing of motor trucks, with some very basic!

recommendations, were delivered as far back as the 28th National*!

Conference on Weights and Measures on June 2, 1938, by C. L. I Richard of your National Bureau of Standards.

Mr. Richard's paper showed that errors as great as 3.2 percent

] were possible when the approaches to scales were not of zero grade, j He also showed that such things as brakes being applied while the i vehicle was being weighed seriously affected the obtaining of true weights. If the report of Mr. Richard had been heeded and the

States had adopted standards for multiple-draft weighing installations

and standards for single-draft weighing installations, the opinion of j many people would be greatly changed concerning scales and their 1 use.Actually I think the American public and the American businessman

| are being cheated by not having scales approved in two brackets. J One classification of scale should be that where the approaches are

j not of zero grade. This type of scale should be approved only for I single-draft weighing. Another classification should be that where the

j approaches are of zero grade and the scale properly installed. This

scale, and this scale only, should be approved for multiple-draft

weighing, if the American public is to be treated fairly.

Now let me get into the subject of weighing trucks on loadometers.

] Following this paper is a copy of a communication from Captain | Kermit E. Lewis to Arthur M. Thurston, Superintendent of the

| Indiana State Police. The subject of this report is: "Weighing

| Techniques For Specially Designed Trailer Equipment." This

j particular piece of equipment was a tandem of very rigid nature and

] contained a load of acid. The more rigid the vehicle the greater the

chance for error. Let me say that experience shows that less rigid vehicles weighed by j a single pair of loadometers under one side and then under the other j 26
side of the vehicle will just give you a lesser amount of error because

: j of a lesser amount of torsional pressure delivered to the rear wheels of

' the semitrailer resting on two scales. Those present at this experiment were representatives of the Stale

Highway Department, State Police Department, trucking company

owning the truck, Standard and Sinclair Oil Companies and Dr.

R. G. Sturm, a physicist of Purdue University.

What brought about this investigation was that weighing with two

loadometers upset simple arithmetic. We knew what the tandem

tractor-trailer unit weighed empty. We knew the volume of the

load of acid and therefore the weight of it. We added the weight

figures and the gross was under the legal limit, Yet, the unit was

seized by State Police, using two portable scales, because it was 7,000

pounds overweight, according to them. We showed the State Police our arithmetic so they agreed to an investigation. And the result of that is this report attached. We found out not only what was wrong

but we also learned that the error is less when four loadometers are

i used instead of just two. The error in this case, with only two loadometers, was 10 percent. With four loadometers, the error was within

the 0.5-percent tolerance.

This report has been circulated by various national groups since

November 1, 1949, yet I understand there are States that are still improperly using the loadometer. Drivers are being convicted in courts today for being a very few pounds over the weight law and

there is a serious doubt in my mind if they actually are overweight.

We in the trucking industry, big and little operators alike, expect

to be regulated. But, we feel we have the right to expect that all the

machinery used in this regulation, whether it be a law or an administrator, or even the weighing scales, be fair and be exact, and that

procedures and practices be uniform.

November 1, 1949 From: Kermit E. Lewis, Staff Captain. To: Arthur M. Thurston, Superintendent.

Subject: Weighing Techniques for Specially esigned Trailer Equipment.

Superintendent, on Oct. 4, 1949, Lieutenant Smith, Marion Lawless of the State Highway Commission and myself went to the Lafayette Post to witness and supervise the test weighing of an acid truck that was owned by

the Ecoff Trucking Company. Present at the weighing were Mr. David

Ecoff, owner of the Ecoff Trucking Company, his attorney, Mr. Genther,

representatives of the Standard and Sinclair Oil Companies, and Dr. Rolland

G. Sturm, a physicist from Purdue University, who did the over-all job of supervising the weight check. This weighing demonstration was conducted

to determine if our normal weighing techniques were accurate when using two loadometers, weighing first one side of a tandem group, then the other, then adding the sum of these two weights to determine the weight of the tandem group. We have had several recent discussions with Mr. Ecoff and arranged this

test weight because it has developed that the weights obtained by the use

of the two loadometers and the techniques heretofore described were not

consistent with the weights registered upon platform scales. At the test, the truck weighed was a tank semitrailer designed especially

for carrying acids. The tank is made of %-inch armor plate and was loaded

to capacity in such a manner that no surging of the acid fore and aft was

possible. The results of the tests and techniques used are as follows: USING TWO LOADOMETERS

Two loadometers were placed under each wheel of the steering axle and

the following weights recorded:
Right steering wheel 3, 800

Left steering wheel 3, 580 Making total for steering axle 7, 380 Next only two loadometers were used and our normal operation procedure

followed in weighing the truck. First we placed two loadometers under- neath the right wheels on the drive tandem group and the following weights were recorded: Right front 8, 960

Right back 9, 250

Total 18,210 Next the two scales were removed from underneath the right wheels and

placed under the left tandem drive wheels and the following weights

recorded:

Left front _ 8, 120

Left back 8, 275

Total _ i__ 16, 395

Therefore: Right side of drive tandem 18, 210

Left side of drive tandem 16, 395

Total weight of drive tandem 34, 605 Using same technique the trailer tandem axle weights are recorded as follows

:

Right front trailer tandem 8, 670 Right back trailer tandem L 9, 320

Total weight of trailer tandem 17, 990

Left front trailer tandem 8, 780

Left back trailer tandem 8, 565

Total weight of trailer tandem 17, 345

Therefore: Right side of trailer tandem 17, 990

Left side of trailer tandem 17, 345 Totals 35, 335

Therefore the total over-all gross weight using the two loadometer technique is Steering axle 7, 380 Drive tandem group 34, 605

Trailer tandem group 35, 335

Gross weight _ _ _ ^ 77, 320 USING FOUR LOADOMETERS

Using four loadometers placing one under each wheel of the tandem group The following weights recorded:

Steering axle remains constant at 7,380 lbs. DRIVE TANDEMS

Left front drive tandem 7, 440

Left back drive tandem 7, 070

Total 14,510

Right front drive tandem 8, 245 Right back drive tandem 8, 430

Total 16,675

28
Therefore:

14, 510

16, 675

Total for drive tandem _ 31, 185 TRAILER TANDEM

Left front trailer tandem 7, 845

Left rear trailer tandem 7, 355

Total 15, 200 Right front trailer tandem 8, 280 Right rear trailer tandem 7, 895

Total i 16, 175

Therefore:

Therefore:

15, 200

16, 175 Total tandem axle 31, 375

Steering axle 1 7,380

Drive tandem group 31, 185

Trailer tandem group 31, 375

Gross ' 69, 940 USING 50 FOOT PLATFORM SCALES

The truck was then driven to the city scales in Lafayette and the following

weights recorded: Gross weight 70,260

Steering axle 7, 680

Steering and drive tandem 38, 880

Therefore: Gross 70,260

-38, 880

Trailer tandem

_

_

31, 380 There was one observation, that was noted, there was a very slight varia- tion in the weights noted when the vehicle was driven forward upon the

scales and the weights recorded in comparison to the weight recorded when

the vehicle was backed upon the scale. This variation was slight enough,

however, to be negligible : also there was a very slight variation in the weights recorded when the vehicle was driven upon the scales and the brakes released. This weight difference at any time did not vary more than 15 pounds. These

unusual variations in weight were explained by Dr. Sturm as being caused by friction in the unusual rocker arm type spring suspension and the shift- ing fore and aft of the center of gravity.

Many extremely interesting points were noted in these weighings; for instance, we took the gross weight of 70,260 pounds as determined by the

city scales, subtracted from it the weight of the steering axle plus the tandem

drive group of 38,880, which left us the indicated weight of 31,380 pounds

for the trailer tandem group. The weight of the trailer tandem group as determined by the four load- ometers was 31,375 pounds, making only a difference of 5 pounds between the weights of our loadometers and the weights by platform scales. The conclusions that can be drawn by this series of tests are these:

1. The loadometer itself is an extremely accurate scale. This is further borne out by the attached laboratory tests made on a loadometer by Purdue

University.

2. When weighing trucks constructed as these acid trucks are, accurate weights cannot be determined by our normal weighing techniques whereby

only two loadometers are used under one side of the vehicle at a time. 29
3. Loadometers can be used to accurately weigh these special type pieces

of equipment or any type vehicle if four loadometers are used or if the load- ometers are recessed within the pavement so there will be no deviation from

the horizontal roadway surface.

4. The weights obtained by platform scales and the use of our loadometers are comparable for all practical purposes. Tabulation of Weights Employing Various Weighing Techniques

Steering

axle Drive tandem

Trailer tandem Gross

Using 2 loadometers first on one side, then the other . Using 4 loadometers one under each tandem wheel - . Axle at a time on platform scales _ _ .

*7, 380

*7, 380

7, 680

34, 605

31, 185

31, 200

35, 335 31,375

31, 380

77, 320

69, 940

70, 260 *Note: Steering-axle weight obtained by using two loadometers, one under each wheel. Mr. Baucom: Mr. Nicholas, would you recommend that the use

of loadometers in highway weight enforcement be prohibited ? Mr. Nicholas: We have found that the latest type loadometer, | when properly used, indicates weights sufficiently accurate for enforce- * ment purposes. In many places they are not properly used. If | loadometers are placed under the wheels on one side of a vehicle, that , weight recorded, and added to the weight obtained by placing j loadometers under the other side of the vehicle; inaccuracies will result. Mr. Reese: One of the principal requisites for accurate axle- ![ weight determinations seems to be level scale approaches. This is an area where weights and measures officials can be of assistance, and

I believe firmly that level scale approaches should be required.

I would suggest further that cooperation among the enforcement \ agencies of the various States should be such that a weight ticket

obtained in one State would be honored in other States. This would

save time both for the trucker and for the enforcing officers. Mr. Richard: I believe we may break down this discussion of highway vehicle weighing into two categories. Weights and measures j officials are particularly interested in one aspect and that is com- | mercial weighing. The highway weight enforcement officials have

interest in the other aspect, axle weights and overloading of highways.

Surely no one considers a loadometer or a similar device as a commercial weighing device. They have an accuracy characteristic generally

of 1 percent as compared with %o percent for commercial scales. I would recommend that highway-weight enforcement officials take I into consideration this possible error. Mr. Leithauser: The 37th National Conference on Weights and | Measures adopted a resolution recommending that a study be made J by the National Bureau of Standards in cooperation with the U. S. 'A Bureau of Public Roads, the trucking industry, and others into the

various causes and amounts of discrepancy in axle-load weighing.

We know these discrepancies occur, even on accurate scales. As

| weights and measures officials we should be interested in determining j why.

We have no sympathy for truckers who deliberately overload and J damage our highways, but, at the same time, we would not want to see truckers prosecuted under conditions which they cannot control. J Mr. Nicholas: I want to assure you that the trucking industry ! favors further research on this subject.

30
Mr. Christie: In New Jersey, since 1942, we have been working

toward having all commercial vehicle scales meet minimum requirements as to approaches. A number of these approved scales have

been used in tentatively determining axle loads. Our weight enforcement officials allow a 5-percent tolerance.

We believe that one of the principal reasons for many load-limit

prosecutions is the effort of the truckers to take full advantage of this

I 5-percent tolerance. We have experimented with 6, 4, and 2 loadometers employed to weigh the axles on a single vehicle. When two

\ loadometers are used, one under each wheel of an axle, the errors developed are well within 2 or 3 percent and always favor the trucker,

i This method of axle-load determination has been demonstrated before

the trucking industry.

We believe that our weight control operations have benefited many

truckers. We have been able to show them how to load their vehicles more efficiently and thus increase their pay loads.

Mr. R. E. Meek : When the highway weight enforcement program

was first instituted in the State of Indiana, I recommended that the

weighing be done on scales sufficient in size to weigh the trucks as one

unit. I was informed that all surveys made by Purdue University,

\ by the engineers of the State Highway Commission, and by others had

! indicated that the predominant damage to State highways was done

by overloaded axles rather than by overloaded trucks. Out of some

7,000 prosecutions in Indiana last year only about 200 of them were

• on a gross over-weight basis. During the past year we tested 87 axle-load scales. The per- formance of these devices under test was well within tolerance. In

addition to known-load tests we made many special weighings on

axles. Variations on successive weighings of the same axle ranged

from zero up to 350 pounds. As a result of these tests I am conI vinced that if the trucker would attempt to load only to the allowable

axle-load limit, he would not be subject to prosecution. Most generally truckers find themselves in trouble only when they attempt to take advantage of the enforcement tolerance.

The Indiana Motor Truck Association has done an excellent job of educating its members. During the year 1949 between 25 and 30

percent of the trucks weighed in Indiana were in violation; whereas,

during this past year less than 1 percent were in violation. This is a splendid improvement, and it exemplifies what can be done through a cooperative effort of a trade association and enforcement agencies.

Mr. Nicholas: Our effort among our members has been a campaign of education. We endeavor to check every arrest notice and to

find the exact reason therefor. We have found that the great majority

1 of weight violations during the past year were violations of axle-load

' limit on the drive axle of the tractor. In many cases we believe that

| this overloading on one axle is caused by a shifting of the cargo. Mr. Powell: I want to verify, the statements made previously

1 that loadometers will give correct weight indication only if they are

" used properly. This Conference has recommended that when these

portable devices are regularly used in pairs, each weigher of each

I such pair shall be appropriately marked to identify them as weighers

'intended to be used in combination. In pairs, loadometers must be

' used one under each wheel of a single axle, never under two wheels

I on one side of a vehicle.

31
Mr. Tate: In reply to Mr. Leithauser's comment I would like

to say that the National Bureau of Standards has begun an investiga- ; tion such as was recommended by the resolution and further that we | hope to expand this investigation during the coming year, provided, s of course, funds are available.

The reaction of an axle and tires against a roadway is not a simple

problem of weight but involves the configuration of the roadway and

the rigidity of the truck body as well. As has been brought up

previously the grade of the approach to a scale is of vital importance.

In order to determine correctly the weight of a motor vehicle, all

j wheels of the vehicle must be on the same level. If you raise the

wheels of only one axle on loadometers, your measurement may differ considerably from the true weight of the axle. Mr. Gehringer: Equipment is not the only element of correct ; axle-load determinations. There is also the matter of operators learning to use that equipment. We know that there are many inherent !j features in motor trucks which cause changes in axle weights. For

example, some changes are caused by shifts in shackles and parts of the chassis assembly.

We also know that drivers of trucks are able to cause definite changes

in axle weights. Experimentally we have asked drivers of large semi- S trailer units to make an effort to cause shifts in axle weights, and we !j have found instances where changes as high as 1,000 pounds can be

caused by the method of applying the brakes and by^slipping the

clutch. Operators of scales must know just how loads are to be

applied and must also see that they are applied in that manner. The scale industry is willing to cooperate with the truckers and with ;| the State enforcement agencies in order to correct some of the dif- ficulties which arise in the determination of axle weights.

(General comments on the subject were made by Mr. Baucom, Mr. Boyle,

and Mr. Campbell.)

(The Conference adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a. m. Wednesday, May 20, 1953.) THIRD SESSION—MORNING OF WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1952

j (A. V. Astin, President, and J. Fred True, Vice President, presiding)

FLOUR WEIGHTS

By Herman Fakler, Vice President, Millers' National Federation, , Washington, D. C. At some time or other in your normal daily routine, you have all likely found sacks of flour in stores or warehouses which did not

conform to the stated weight on the package. At times they may have

been overweight but in other instances they were underweight.

You may have been obliged to take action in some instances. That

is a part of your responsibility—to take whatever steps are required

to protect the consumer, the manufacturer, or both. . You may

have wondered, at times, as to the integrity of flour millers if you

encountered what appeared to you to be an unreasonable number of short weight packages.

In many respects wheat flour is a strange commodity. It has an irritating capacity to gain or to lose moisture. We say- irritating

because it is this characteristic that is responsible for most of our common problems associated with maintaining apparent full weight

in flour packages. We shall elaborate on this later. Before doing so 32
you may be interested in some background information on the

actual physical process of packing flour. The package represents the channel through which flour flows from

mill to consumer. It must be sanitary, protective, economical.

It must contain proper, full weight of product to assure honest

value to the eventual user. Simple statements these, yet the at- tainment requires comprehensive effort on the part of the miller. In a broad sense there are two major considerations associated with

the accomplishment. The first, the actual preparation of the flour package, is directly under the supervision of the miller and is his responsibility. The second relates to the storage conditions to which

flour may be subjected after leaving the mill. This is most always

beyond the control of the miller and is usually not his responsibility.

Let us give a bit of thought to each phase.

Flour mills have automatic equipment and have established pro- grams designed to assure proper weight of each package at the time

flour sacks are filled. The tare weight for the specific package has

been determined in a precise manner. This includes tare weights

for coupons, inserts, tape seal or any other items forming a part of the final package. The packing supervisor adjusts his full package

weight accordingly. It is his responsibility to make sure that each

and every package is full net weight when packed within reasonable

and practical limits. Improper package weights can occur through fault}' operation of mechanical equipment, errors in machine adjustment or the effect of the human element, careless or inadvertent. Flour mills attempt

to eliminate all these errors through the use of automatic check weighing equipment and, in some instances, through employment of

full time weight checkers. Such an individual is assigned the task of checking the weight of packages being delivered from each packingline whenever operating. He usually works independently of the

packing department and is directly responsible to the plant

superintendent.

We should like to elaborate on the manner in which a weight

checker operates in many mills. At regular hourly intervals he

selects several consecutive packages from a packing line. Each

is weighed separately. The average weight of these control packages

is recorded. These data enable those responsible to quickly appraise

the reliability and accuracy of the packing operation. As long as the average package weights remain within specified control limits, no scale adjustment is made on the particular packaging line. Immediate correction is made when a weight falls outside the control

limit. Whenever adjustments are made, immediate additional weight

checks are taken in sufficient number to made sure the correction

is adequate.

The range in the weight of the packages is also recorded. This is equally important. For a packaging operation to be considered as satisfactory it must meet requirements as to both average and range

in weights. An examination of mill files of permanent packing records

will show package weights within control limits and on the heavy

side in weight.

We mention these details only to illustrate how flour millers handle

this important operating problem. We feel that these programs of controlled checking provide adequate protection against those factors

contributing to improper package weights.

33
Let us now consider the second phase of the flour packaging problem having to do with conditions of storage. After leaving the mill proper, flour may be held in warehouses or stores with a wide range of environment. Temperatures and humidity may vary greatly. Flour

reacts quickly to either or both. Flour is hygroscopic. It readily

takes on or loses moisture, depending on the atmospheric conditions

to which it is exposed. Moisture change would reflect directly in corresponding weight changes.

Many studies have been made covering various aspects of this particular property of flour. Package size, type of container, length

of storage time, are some of the factors studied in this connection.

One of the most comprehensive and practical independent investigations was carried out by a group of cereal chemists at the University

of Minnesota in 1942. 1 For this experiment a common lot of flour was packed in 5-, 10-, and

24^-lb sacks, paper and cotton, and stored in air conditioned cabinets,

where the temperature and humidity could be closely and accurately

controlled. Levels of relative humidity were maintained at 36, 45,

59, and 72 percent, each at a temperature of 70° F. At this point I should direct attention to the fact that this study was conducted prior to the time the flour milling industry, in cooperation with weights and measures officials throughout the country,

worked out and put into effect a uniform schedule of flour package

weights. This accounts for the use of the 24%-lb package. The

industry is thoroughly convinced that the schedule of flour package

sizes now in universal use is definitely in the public interest, and the

industry wishes to acknowledge your cooperation in bringing about

this result. The original weight of the various bags of flour was carefully

measured, and the moisture content of the flour accurately determined.

After 3 days of storage in the several cabinets, package weight and

moisture content was again determined. Thereafter at weekly in- tervals this process was repeated throughout the full storage period

of approximately 10 weeks.

This study brought out a number of pertinent observations. They

are of special importance to millers responsible for flour packing and

to you enforcement officials responsible for appraising the true weight

value of this particular commodity where it becomes available to the consumer. The experiments revealed that flour weights respond

sharply to changes in relative humidity. In general, flour, as normally

packed, will lose weight unless the relative humidity of the storage

atmosphere is 60 percent or more. If over 60 percent, flour will gain

weight. If under, it will lose. The rate of change is more rapid

during the first few days of storage.

If the storage period is sufficiently long, the flour will approach

a leveling-off point though it never becomes absolutely constant in weight. The degree of change depends on the initial moisture content

of the flour to a large extent in addition to the relative humidity of the storage area. Weight changes were more rapid for cotton than for paper bags

and for the smaller size packages. As the storage period was ex- tended, there was a tendency for weight to equalize regardless of

size or type of container.

1 Anker-Geddes-Bailey, Cereal Chem. 19:128-150. 1942. A study of the Net Weight Changes and Moisture Content of Wheat Flour at Various Relative Humidities. 34
Thus, you can see that if it were possible to maintain each warehouse or each grocery store at a relative humidity of 60 percent, at

least as far as the flour storage area is concerned, we would have little occurrence of apparent short weight in flour packages. We could

anticipate little change in moisture content of the flour and therefore

little change in flour weight.

If relative humidity were maintained at 72 percent, a gain in weight would take place. After one week under such conditions a

5-lb package of flour would gain about % ounce in net weight. The

same package stored at 45-percent relative humidity would lose about

l)i ounce after exposure of one week. At 36-percent relative humidity

the net weight loss would be a little over 1% ounces, after a like storage period.

From all of this we can see that flour rarely, if ever, remains the same in actual weight over a period of time. Relative humidity is more often under than over 60 percent. For this reason you are more apt to encounter apparent weight shortages rather than overages

in your examination of flour packages. It also explains the greater

prevalence of such finding in the winter season, or on those occasions

when the heating of space indoors prevails. Conversely, there is less apparent underweight during the summer months when high humidity

is the rule. This stud}' brought out another major point. Although flour will lose moisture as well as regain it, the rate of loss is much more rapid

than the rate of regain. This phenomenon has not been completely

explained as yet, but this is one of the reasons why we previously

referred to this peculiar property of flour to fluctuate in weight as an

irritating characteristic

.

We understand that experiments of a similar nature have been

conducted by Federal Food and Drug Administration officials, and

that their findings agree substantially with those obtained by the

University of Minnesota scientists. Although the government data

are not available for distribution, we understand any state or city

weight enforcement official may have access to this information at

field offices. Assuming flour weight loss is accounted for by evaporation loss occasioned by factors beyond control, this does not solve your inspection problem. You may well ask these direct questions of the flour

miller.

1. Since the miller assuredly knows his package will most likely

lose weight before it reaches the consumer, why doesn't he overpack

in anticipation of such loss? It would be impossible to predict how

much to overpack, since he could only prophesy full net weight at destination by preparing for the extremes of temperature and humidity. Xo guarantee could be made, since flour continually changes in weight. There is also the question of the legality of deliberately

packing packages that are substantially overweight. In addition if this were made mandatory the cost to the consumer would be in- creased. In effect, we would merely be forcing the consumer to purchase a larger unit of flour, which would still be subject to the same potential evaporation changes. It is your responsibility as well

as ours to avoid any course of action which would deliberately raise

prices. From another viewpoint if it were mandatory to overpack

in anticipation of flour being shipped to areas where weight loss would

be anticipated, it should be equally permissible to underpack for 35
shipping to areas, such as our seaboard, where weight gain is a reasonable probability.

2. Why not pack flour in a moisture proof container? This could

be done, but it is not practical, and the cost to the consumer would

be prohibitive. Again we are not adequately protecting Mrs. America

if we deliberately increase the price of flour, which would be one result of such a course of action. In addition, we do not believe it is good

practice to pack flour in a completely airtight container. Some aeration of flour enhances its baking properties. This desirable maturing

action, as we call it, is possible in the present types of container.

There is also the danger of mold developing when freshly milled flour

is packed in an airtight package.

3. Why not reduce the moisture content of flour at the time of milling to minimize any further loss later? Couldn't the miller grind

wheat that is lower in moisture content ? We select wheat on the basis of the quality of the finished flour it will produce. Its moisture content is incidental and entirety dependent on the whims of nature. Actually, reasonable variations in the

amount of moisture in the wheat are unimportant. All mills try to maintain a certain range of moisture in the wheat as it comes to the

grinding rolls preparatory to conversion into flour. There is one

reason for this, and one reason only. The object is to so condition

the wheat that the most complete separation of flour and branny

material can be made. Usually this means the miller adds some

water to "temper" the wheat, as the process is called. After so doing,

the wheat is permitted to stand in tempering bins for a certain period

of time, usually 8 to 10 hours. This permits the water to penetrate

the branny portions of the wheat berry. This toughens these layers

of the berry so that they will flake off rather than shatter. This

makes possible a more complete separation of the endosperm or starchy material we know as flour. If this separation is not complete we get a flour that is specky in appearance, dark in color, possibly

inferior in baking quality, and may not meet the Federal definitions

and standards of identity for flour. It is true that the more moisture that is added to the wheat, the

higher the moisture content of the flour is apt to be. However,

we are limited in the amount of moisture that can be added and still permit a satisfactory milling job. Too much moisture will make it difficult, if not impossible, to accomplish the necessary sifting within

the mill. Clogging and gumming up of the extremely fine silk bolting sieves will take place. It is necessary therefore to stay

within narrow limits of moisture content in both wheat and flour. The Federal Government recognizes this in its establishment of a

limit of 15 percent moisture content for wheat flour. Freshly milled

flour is usually around 13.5 to 14.5 percent moisture.

We have not as yet mentioned the one point which resolves most

of the associated weight problems. If a bag of flour is full net weight

when it leaves the mill and enters channels of interstate commerce,

that bag will always give the consumer full food value when purchased, regardless of any apparent change in weight which may

have taken place. The only qualification is that there be no loss of product due to leakage or spillage. You need only be concerned

with this in your program of weight inspection. Assurance on this one point will automatically protect consumer and manufacturer

alike. Let me repeat. Barring loss due to leakage or spillage, a 36
bag of flour having full weight at the time it is packed and leaves

the mill will always give the consumer full food value regardless of apparent change in weight due to moisture variation. This is a most

important point in our discussion.

Why is this true? For this simple reason. When flour is pre- pared for baking, it is combined with water or some form of liquid.

If a specific parcel of flour has lost moisture, it will be possible to add an equivalent amount of liquid when it is used. The homemaker

makes this adjustment automatically without knowledge or concern

of cup weight or moisture content of the flour. There is no loss whatsoever due to the flour itself having become drier. It is the

solid matter or dry material in flour that determines its value as far as weight alone is concerned. That value will always remain the same relatively as the original net weight.

This factor is recognized by our Federal Government in its regulations covering weight of flour packages. Reasonable variations in

weight are permitted if they fall into one of two classifications

:

1. Those which occur in good manufacturing practice and which

cannot reasonably be avoided.

2. Those which occur because of exposure to condition which may

occur in good distribution practice.

The first of these applies specifically to the manufacturing and

packaging of flour and does not involve evaporation loss. Variations

at the time of packaging must be as often above as below the stated

net weight of the package and the average weight of all packages

must be as much as the declared weight for a single package. Unreasonable shortages, or overages, are not permitted. This arbitrarily

prohibits deliberate overpacking or underpacking.

The second point applies specifically to the problem of evaporation

loss. It recognizes that such losses will occur to some extent even in good distribution channels, but that normally the changes take

place after the product is no longer under control of the manufacturer.

There are differences between the various State laws or regulations

governing flour package weights. Most States follow the pattern of Federal interpretation. Some spell out specific tolerances on a weight

or a percentage basis. All are subject to interpretations made by

State or local authorities.

Since most all flour travels in interstate commerce, it follows that a majority of flour millers must produce a product which conforms

to Federal regulations and those of many, if not all. States. The

flour miller is, therefore, vitally interested in the State interpretations

of weight regulations.

We believe it would be of fundamental advantage if enforcement

officials in all States would adopt and follow a uniform set of in- terpretations and procedures. We further believe that this can be

accomplished effectively within existing statutes. To do so would

make your inspection more efficient and provide more protection to the public. With this in mind we should like to propose that this Conference consider four suggestions, constituting a uniform procedure

for checking the weight of flour packages.

1. Concentrate check weighing of flour at primary points of dis- tribution, where large quantities of flour are available. Mill, wholesale, and chain warehouses, and other jobbing outlets are examples.

City and county weights and measures officials located in smaller

communities would probably not have the same opportunity in this 37
regard as would enforcement officials at State levels. Therefore, it would appear desirable to suggest that local officials consult and

cooperate with their respective State officials.

2. Follow the Federal regulations and procedures, and make allow- ance for reasonable weight variations.

3. Arrange to obtain accurate moisture analyses of representative

samples of any questioned flour stocks.

4. Promptly notify the mill involved when the weight of its flour stocks is questioned. In order to coordinate activities within a State it would appear to be in order to suggest that, in addition to notifying the mill involved, the city and county officials might wish

also to notif}T their State officials. By concentrating your check weighing of flour packages to ware- house stocks, you would greatly simplif}' and extend the effectiveness

of your control over this problem. Warehouse stocks represent the

largest concentrations of flour within your jurisdiction. Package

weights and storage conditions are easily checked at such points.

You, as enforcement officials, could effectively control a much greater

volume of material, and prevent short-weight packages from reaching

either the retail store or the eventual consumer.

Details of the procedures followed by the Federal Food and Drug

Administration are set forth in the official regulations for the enforcement of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, as well as in administrative

procedures. As indicated to you in a paper delivered before your

Conference on May 25, 1949, by Mr. John L. Harve}-, Associate

Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, data are available to you as cooperating enforcement officials and may be examined

by you at any of their offices. You may rightly ask how you, as enforcement officials, can dis- tinguish between a legitimate weight change caused by moisture variation and one which is actually short weight, deliberate or accidental.

Gentlemen, there is only one final infallible method. This requires

that an accurate moisture analysis be made of the flour in question.

With this information available, it can be easily determined if the flour package contained full weight when it left the mill. We realize that you cannot analyze the moisture content of flour on the spot as you make your weight checks. We do suggest, however,

that you arrange to g£t this information whenever your inspection

discloses a lot of flour that you consider as unreasonably short of weight. It may be possible for you to have a moisture analysis made

by your own local or State laboratory. Flour mill laboratories would

be glad to provide this service at your request. Should you desire it, mill records would readily be disclosed to you showing moisture content of a specific lot of flour at the time it left the mill, or any other

pertinent information you would like that we have available.

We strongly urge and request your favorable consideration of these

suggestions and the adoption of the four recommendations we have

made.

To this end, may we suggest that a committee be created by the

President of this Conference, this committee to consist of three weights

and measures officials to be appointed by him and three representatives

of the milling industry to be appointed by the Millers' National

Federation. Further, we suggest that the President request that a representative of the Federal Food and Drug Administration be

designated by the Commissioner of that agency to serve as a consultant

38
to the committee, and that the Chief of the Office of Weights and

Measures, National Bureau of Standards, also be requested to serve

as a consultant to the committee.

Finally, we suggest that the President of this Conference designate one of the three weights and measures officials appointed to the

committee to serve as its chariman and to see that the committee

formulates resolutions to be presented to the 39th National Conference on Weights and Measures for action.

I want to acknowledge the collaboration in the preparation of this paper of four members of the industry, O. W. Galloway of Pillsbury

Flour Mills, O. A. Oudal of General Mills, John T. Lynch of International Milling Company, and C. E. Joyce also of Pillsbury.

Mr. G. B. Smith: As a result of many complaints, we have

instituted several investigations into net weights of flour packages.

In 1949, at the request of representatives of the flour industry, a regulation was drafted and promulgated in the State of Michigan.

The regulation is very similar to the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetics Act. Early this year, and again as a result of many complaints, we

check-weighed 146 packages of flour and found not one of the 146

packages contained full weight. These were 10-pound packages and

only three packages grossed at the declared net weight. The gross weight of all other packages was less than the labeled net weight.

My recommendation for a solution to this problem is for the flour

mills to overpack in a sufficient amount to allow for normal shrinkage.

Mr. Watsox: Mr. Fakler has made it clear that the moisture

content of flour is an important part of the problem of packing the

commodity and of insuring correct weight. It might be worthwhile

to consider an agreement whereby net weight at time of packing would

be allowed. I would like further to offer for your consideration the

possibility of a Federal inspection service at the mills, accompanied by

a 100 percent checkweighing of the packages.

Mr. Fakler: The labeling of "weight when packed," if recognized

by State enforcement officials, would solve our problems. Because of Federal regulations we are required to have full net weight in each

package when it enters interstate commerce. The flour, with 14

percent moisture content, is full net weight when it leaves the mill. Our flour packages are checkweighed at the mill. You, as enforcement

officials, are at liberty to check the mill records at any time. We

have absolute moisture and weight records of every package of flour that leaves the mill. Mr. Battcom: I would like to offer the suggestion that packages of

flour be labeled with both the net weight and the moisture content. With this information a weights and measures enforcement official easily could determine whether or not the package contained full weight when it left the mill. Mr. Austin: I will make a motion that the President of this Conference appoint a committee to study this problem of flour weights

and report back with specific recommendations to the 39th National

Conference on Weights and Measures. The committee is to consist

of three weights and measures officials, one of whom is to be appointed

as Chairman, and three representatives of the milling industry, to be

selected by the Miller's National Federation. A representative of the

Federal Food and Drug Administration and the Chief, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards, are to be

designated as consultants to the committee.

39
(The motion was seconded, and, on a standing vote, was carried 67 ayes as against 39 noes.) (Additional general comment on this subject was made bv Mr. Campbell, Mr. Rhein, Mr. Fakler, Dr. Astin, Mr. Bussey, and Mr. O. W. "Galloway.)

AUTOMATIC PACKAGE WEIGHING MACHINERY

By W. A. Schevrer, President, National Scale Men's Association, Columbus, Ohio

As the new president of the National Scale Men's Association,

I deem it an honor and a privilege to represent our splendid organization

at this Conference, and I take this opportunity to greet you on behalf

of our membership. Our annual convention at Atlanta, Georgia,

two months ago was one of the finest and most enthusiastic meetings

of scale men and weights and measures officials ever held by our

group.

I feel, as I am sure all members of the National Scale Men's Association feel, that we can, and should, work very closely with the National

Bureau of Standards and weights and measures departments in the

various States in matters relating to scales. Scales are one of the most important necessities of a progressive

civilization, yet one of the most neglected.

I shall discuss some of the new techniques rapidly gaining favor

in high-speed automatic check-weighing. When we consider the

value of consumer-size packages sold by weight at something like $8,000,000,000 per year, we begin to realize that this is a very important segment of our economy.

During the past several decades, many of the functions of the

independent storekeeper have been replaced by prepackaging at the

factory level. Years ago, the storekeeper purchased his product by

weight, in bulk form. The cracker barrel and the bean bag provided an adequate means of displaying the product. He weighed the

quantity desired by the retail customer over a manual scale and

packaged it in paper bags. This method of merchandising in a

relatively uncomplicated era had its advantages and disadvantages.

But regardless of its advantages, it was destined for discard when

mass production and increasing competition forced the merchant

to improve his method of displaying his wares. The functions of display, weighing, and packaging already have been taken over by

factory packaging and distribution through self-service supermarkets.

For the most part, the functions performed by prepackaging and

self-service not only are more efficient than comparable functions

carried out by the storekeeper, but also are more convenient for the

customer.

The increased efficiency of machine packaging and self-service has

resulted in a very significant decrease in the cost of exhibiting the

product to the ultimate consumer. Tremendous strides have been

made in the packaging field, and the trend continues as more and more

products are prepared for distribution in package form. In addition,

many new products, such as frozen foods, factory formulated cake

mixes, and aerosols, have resulted from the increased acceptance of

this form of distribution.

Where products are packaged at high speed, it is difficult to achieve

weight accuracy comparable to that achieved by weighing over a manual scale. Automatic equipment , capable of guaranteeing accurate weights at speeds comparable with packaging machines, has been

available only for a relatively short time. As a consequence, due to 40
the lack of such necessary equipment, there has been a tendency to overlook this important aspect of the distribution function.

Everyone will agree that the filling machine which is so accurate

it needs no checkweigher would be a highly desirable piece of equipment. Better filling machines will appear as techniques are developed.

Every filling machine is capable of doing a filling job with a certain

degree of efficiency. The need for a checkweigher can be likened to the need for a micrometer in machine tool operation. The better the

lathe, the closer we attempt to hold tolerances, and we accomplish

this by measuring the turned parts with the micrometer. Likewise,

the better the filling machine, the closer we should hold weights and

tolerances. The fact that more accurate machine tools are available

does not mean that micrometers are less in demand. Actually, the

reverse is true, because it is just as important to keep a good machine

operating at its best as it is to keep a poor machine operating at its best. For a number of reasons, there has been a tendency to overlook

weight errors in packages produced on high speed filling lines. When

discussing tolerances, some packers refer to such vague terms as "good commercial tolerance" and "average weight of 24 cartons should

equal printed net weight on each carton," etc. We believe that high

speed packaging, prior to the time 100-percent automatic check-weighing became a reality, was entitled to broad usage of the term "tol- erance." Today, however, there are fast and efficient means of cle- tei mining the weight of each carton, and means for keeping filling

machines in control. I am sure that everyone in this group will agree that high speed and accuracy generally are opposed to each other;

yet accurate weights are critically important, not only to the customer,

but also to the producer. Practically all of the materials which the

processors buy are bought by weight. Inadequate control of the

weights of the outgoing product can mean the difference between

operating at a profit or at a loss. The following statement was made by one of the speakers at the

22nd National Packaging Conference and Exposition in Chicago last month, "Important packaging executives are generally agreed that

the control of fill is one of the most serious questions they face. There

can be no compromise on weight standards; the economic loss from

overfill in industry can run into the millions, and the hazards of underfill are obvious."

Now, since there is ample evidence that packaging executives know

that there is a serious problem in packaging, and that both underfill

and overfill are hazards, why do they not solve the problem by giving

correct weights ? All too few packers have any real knowledge of the weight variation in their outgoing product . They may kid themselves into believing that they have accurate weights, or that their

weight control measures are adequate. Most packers, however, feel a little uncomfortable and uncertain when the subject of weight

tolerance of the outgoing product is mentioned. To date, the

greatest emphasis in packaging has been placed on increasing speeds.

A great deal of thought has been given to increasing the speed of packaging machines. Whenever a group of packaging men sit down

to compare notes, 99 percent of the conversation is devoted to bragging

about production speeds. When a man says his line is running at 120 per minute, or 300 per minute, he feels quite sure of himself. He

can see the speed at which the line is running, and can measure its

2698'<0

06 4 41
output. He is much less sure of himself when he discusses weight

tolerance, and will give some vague figure which has no basis in fact. The weight tolerance of the outgoing product is a ticklish subject.

Unaccounted loss of product is a sore point. When face to face with

the problem, and since they are unaware of an adequate solution,

many processors seem to feel that, if they simply ignore the problem,

it will go away.

Why has the packer had no real knowledge of the weight variation

in his outgoing product ? The reason is simply this. Until very

recently there has been no means of readily and continually measuring

weight variations; consequently, the assumption that everything was

in control. Please mark that I said, "Until very recently." With today's

marvelous mechanical and electronic developments, there is no longer

any necessity of this uncertainty regarding weight control. Mr.

Arthur Sanders, Executive Secretary of the National Association of Scale Manufacturers, says, " Check-weighing of packages to insure

weight protection in continuous flow of packaging operations is a must." This requirement has encouraged the development of specialized scales with predetermined weight characteristics for repetitive

weighing. To facilitate this, numerous developments have come about

in this centmy, developments which are designed to fit the particular

need of the operation, varying between check-weighing a few heavy

packages an hour to many light cartons a minute. Manual "spot

checking" with special scales is the practice with many processors, but this necessarily causes a break in the continuity of high speed

package movement in production plants.

At the other extreme, equipment for 100 percent automatic checkweighing is a more recent development of the American scale industry.

For accurate shell loading in the war, mechanical scales were teamed

with electronic control for automatic continuous flow check-weighing.

This development has provided an important recent contribution to the handling of materials, and has received world-wide recognition.

The important recent contribution to which I refer is the electronic

checkweigher for packaged commodities. The Selectrol automatic,

electronic checkweigher provides a means for controlling the weights

of outgoing packages. It forms an integral part of the package con- veyor line, and consequently does not interrupt the normal flow of production.

The Selectrol automatically weighs each package as it moves along

the conve}^or, and rejects those packages which are outsidfe the

desired tolerance limits. The rejected packages then can be trimmed

to the correct weight and returned to the conveyor line. A single

Selectrol, plus one girl, can provide absolute assurance of packageweight accuracy. In addition, it continuously polices the process for unwanted trends in variation. An increase in the percentage of

rejects on either the underweight or overweight side is an immediate

indication of the presence of a trend, and calls for corresponding

adjustment in the filling machine. In a normal packaging operation,

at least 8 manual checkweighers would be required to perform a

similar function, with less accuracy and much less speed in detecting

unwanted trends in variations.

I have used the term "trends," and it may not be entirely clear what are trends, and how important they are in packaging. Also, at this point you may be wondering why we cannot gather data on pro- 42
duction line accuracy by ordinary hand-weighing or with a "spot

check."

Manual, spot check-weighing, which is the means of weight control

most generally used by processors, leaves much to be desired. First,

it never will assure that every package produced is within the desired

weight tolerance. Second, at modern packaging-line speeds, anything

other than a very spotty check-weighing results in excessive labor

costs. Third, manual operation is subject to the human error. Any

highly routine operation, such as manual check-weighing, is extremely

subject to such human errors as are caused by fatigue, inexperience, or indifference.

In addition, manual operation is unlikely to provide adequate or accurate information to supervisors so that corrective action can be

taken. Most persons naturally are reluctant to report a condition

that might adversely reflect on the ability of a fellow employee.

Fourth, the very nature of the causes of package-weight variations are such that adequate control can be achieved only when an appreciable

portion of the total production is checked. The cost of providing

adequate check-weighing by manual methods generally is considered

to be excessive.

Now, to explain trends, there are many factors which cause package

weights to vary. Typical of these are:

1. Changes in density of the product.

2. Adjustment of the filler. 3. Uncertainty in the cut-off of the filler. 4. Variations in amount of product in the filler hopper.

5. Changes in the flow characteristics of the product.

All of the above factors fall into either one of two categories

:

1. A random or pure chance pattern. These factors cause the

weight to vary rapidly, and result in weight variations between consecutive packages. This pattern of random variations is characteristic

of a particular product and packaging process. In general, it can be

controlled only through machine design and maintenance.

2. Trends. These factors cause variation in the weight of consecutive groups of packages, rather than consecutive individual

packages. Variations in density of product, between top and bottom

of a hopper, is a good example of this type of cause of variations.

To control the weights of packaged products, it is important to distinguish between these two types of variations. The human

operator making sporadic spot-check weighing has difficulty in dis- tinguishing between the two types of variations, since the random

variations are superimposed upon the trends. The human checkweigher is guided only by experience and intuition. As a result, they

actually may control the process in the wrong direction at any particular instant, and surely will have difficulty in detecting trends

until they are of appreciable magnitude. Any packaging process can be controlled to that weight tolerance dictated by the random variation. Proper control of the filling machine can eliminate the trends

with a consequent appreciable reduction in both the over-all weight

tolerance and the loss of product through overfill. The Selectrol automatic, electronic checkweigher provides the out- standing features of (1) 100 percent check of outgoing package weights

with assurance that 100 percent of the packages are within the correct weight tolerance, (2) speedy detection of trends in package weight

43
variations, (3) no disruption in the continuous flow of the product on

the packaging line, (4) no variation in the weight quality level because

of fatigue or human error, and (5) assurance to the processor of confidence with respect to package weights.

Many remarkable developments have been made in packaging

machinery, both in increasing the production speed and in increasing

the filling accuracy. The perfect filling machine, however, probably

never will be built. I suppose a perfect filling machine would be one which would operate indefinitely at any desired speed, and with no

variation in package weights. Although filling-machine manufacturers will continue to press toward that goal, it is unlikely that such an ideal will be achieved. As a result, some means of assuring the

processor of weight quality always will be needed. The Selectrol

automatic, electronic checkweigher has been developed to fill this need.

We believe a short description of the mechanics of the Selectrol

weighing system will be of interest to this group.

In the Selectrol system, the weighing element is reduced to the

simplest possible mechanical device. It is simply an even-balance

1 : 1 ratio weighing lever. No mechanical means is provided for observing the magnitude of the lever motion. The usual indicating

system would be unsatisfactory, since Selectrol instruments usually

must be operated at high speeds. Consequently, the lever system is designed in such a manner that it becomes a mechanically-resonant

structure whose natural resonant frequency, or rate of free oscillation,

is slightly in excess of the maximum operating speed for which the

unit is designed. A factor in the resonant frequency is the total mass

applied to the weighing member, and, obviously, this includes the

weight of the object being weighed. Reduced to simple terms, this means that, if a particular unit is designed for 100 weighings per

minute, the total mass of the movable system of the scale is calculated

for its moment of inertia. Sufficient reactance is applied as a restor- ing force to cause the weighing member to oscillate, when perfectly

balanced, at a slightly higher rate than 100 complete c}7 cles per minute.

Neglecting damping factors such as air resistance and friction, the

structure adheres to all basic laws pertaining to resonance. Thus,

the time required for any one oscillatory cycle is always identical to the other, regardless of the respective magnitudes of the two observed

cycles. Proof of this may be observed by the use of a simple pendulum. If a long pendulum is moved from its dormant perpendicular

position by an angle of 20 degrees and released, the time required for it to swing to the opposite extreme of its travel, reverse its direction,

and return, will be found to be identical to the time required if the

displacement is only 10 degrees. In the case of a pendulum, the re- storing force is, of course, the pull of gravity; consequently, the actual mass employed does not affect the frequency of oscillation, since the

restoring force varies directly with the weight of the mass. However,

if a restoring force other than gravity is utilized, the mass becomes a

variable factor as regards frequency.

Gravit}^ never is used as the restoring force in modern weighing

instruments except for applications where speed is not an important

factor. Most commercial weighing of predetermined mass utilizes a

structure comprising an even-balance weighing member with a limited lever travel, and, for the restoring force, a pair of high-grade

calibrated spring-members. The system balances to the zero or null 44
point if identical masses are applied to the weighing members and the

springs are not a factor. If there should exist a slight inequality

between the two masses, the difference is absorbed by a change in dimension of the restorative springs and is indicated by a suitable

dial. This makes possible a faster-operating scale and the system

has been developed to a high degree.

Incidentally, it is interesting to note that, while many users of

weighing equipment are prejudiced against spring scales in general,

practically all industrial equipment utilizes some form of spring for the restoring medium. The use of a resonant structure, called a tuning fork, is used as a frequency standard in tuning musical instruments. This is an example of an extremely accurate device and is, in effect, a tuned spring. The most accurate clocks and watches ever

built depend upon the constant unchanging action of a spring exerting

a force in opposition to a so-called balance wheel.

Selectrol instruments utilize the same principle. In order to make

the weighing system respond rapidly, relatively stiff springs are used.

This results in much less lever movement per unit of weight than

normally occurs with conventional scales. At this point I want to stress that less deflection per unit of weight

does not mean a less accurate scale. As a matter of fact, percentage

error due to friction is reduced as movement is reduced. In speaking

of accuracy or sensibility reciprocal of the ordinary scale, we generally

refer to movement of an indicator that can be read by an operator;

thus, we are limited, insofar as maximum lever speed is concerned,

by ability of an operator to detect movement visually.

As far as the Selectrol automatic cheekweigher is concerned, there

is no advantage in providing a dial that can be read by an operator,

except for the purpose of setting up the machine initially. A high

order of magnification must be provided for this purpose, and electrical means are required for operating weight-selection mechanism.

There are many methods of accomplishing magnification of the

small motions involved. Mechanical means are ruled out because of the friction they would necessarily add to the system, and also for the added inertia. Optical magnification would be more advantageous, but it generally is not desirable, since photoelectric means

would be required in addition to a precise optical system. Such an

arrangement would be satisfactory for a very elementary sort of device, but, when several selection circuits are required, the system

becomes difficult to adjust.

Electronic magnification eliminates completely all disadvantages of the aforementioned systems and, in addition, offers man}7 other advantages. Magnification of any degree is possible from the same

component parts. A voltage can be developed that is proportional

to weighcircuits. This voltage can also be used to operate the visual

balance indicator, and the indicator may be placed at any convenient

location. Since the interpreting means is converted into electrical values whose magnitude is proportional to the weighing member's

position, frictionless electrical damping of lever oscillation becomes

possible.

This last feature is of great importance, since it allows the mechanical weighing member to be operated at its critically damped point.

This means the scale lever is able to reach a state of equilibrium in

the shortest possible time. Travel of % cycle and over will be practically eliminated.

45
The electronic circuits of a Selectrol represent a simple, straightforward application of electronics. A vacuum tube oscillator is employed, and is so arranged that its frequency will vary in accordance

with weigh-lever displacement. Weigh-lever displacement simply

changes the capacity of the oscillator's tuned circuit. The varying

frequency signal is fed to a conventional F. M. (frequency modulation)

detector circuit, very similar to that employed in the ordinary F. M.

radio receiver. The output from the F. M. detector circuit is a d-c

voltage that is used for operating the electrical indicator, the electrical damping circuit, and weight classification relays. Conventional vac- uum-tube amplifiers and voltage-regulating means are employed.

Variations in tubes, aging of component parts, etc., have no effect upon operation of the equipment, since routine operating adjustments

compensate for these effects. (Mr. Scheurer showed and explained a short moving picture and a number of lantern slides which demonstrated the operation of automatic package weighing

machinery.)

PROBLEMS IN LIVESTOCK WEIGHING SUPERVISION

By C. L. Richard, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing, Livestock Branch, Packers and Stockyards Division, U. S. Department of Agriculture

In the year 1921 Congress enacted a Federal stature, known as the

Packers and Stockyards Act, which authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to supervise and regulate the marketing of livestock at public

stockyards of major size. Enforcement of the Act was delegated to the Department's Livestock Branch which I represent. Since live- stock, particularly slaughter livestock, is universally sold by weight,

many marketing supervision problems relate directly to the weighing

facilities and weighing practices employed at the regulated markets.

In accordance with your Conference Secretary's request I shall discuss

the problems inherent in the Federal program of livestock weighing

supervision.

Last year the average American consumed some 145 pounds of meat in the form of beef, veal, pork, lamb, and mutton. Most of it, consumed in the home, was purchased throughout the year in small

amounts at retail markets. It was purchased by weight and, allo wing

for the possible effects of the traditional "butcher's thumb", was

weighed correctly because (1) a local inspector of weights and measures had tested the retail market scales and had certified them as accurate,

(2) the meat was weighed in the presence of the purchaser and (3) if there were doubts regarding the weight the purchaser could have his

purchase check-weighed or reweighed.

Last year too, so that each of us might have our 145 pounds per

capita share of the national meat supply, the farmers and ranchers

of the 48 states produced and sent to market for slaughter well over one hundred million cattle, calves, hogs, sheep and lambs. For that

crop of meat animals they collected a cash revenue of approximately

nine billion dollars, a greater amount than was received for any other

product of their agriculture. The year's entire production of slaughter

livestock was sold by weight—by live weight, on the hoof. It was

sold in individual lots ranging from a single lamb of 50 pounds live weight to a group of fattened steers weighing over 30,000 pounds.

Having mentioned reasons why the meat consumer's retail purchases were weighed correctly, it is appropriate to consider what protection

46
and safeguards were provided for the individual farmers of the nation

when they sold their livestock, by weight, at market.

There are three types of market outlet through which farmers may

dispose of livestock intended for slaughter. The first consists of 66

terminal stockyards which are located at cities of major size and at which more than half of all livestock is marketed. These are public

markets where livestock is consigned to commission firms who act as the farmers' selling agents. Sales to packers or other buyers are negotiated by "private treaty" which means that each prospective

buyer, in turn, inspects the animals and makes his offer of price.

When agreement is reached on price, the animals are weighed and

their weight is recorded on a scale ticket to form the basis of financial

settlement. Weighing and weight recording are performed by employees of the terminal stockyard companies, except that, in the State

J of Minnesota, by special provision in the Federal statute regulating

public stockyards, they are performed by State employees.

The second type of outlet for the farmer's livestock consists of some

2,100 Auction Markets which are located at rural trading centers in 47

of the states. At these, most of which operate one day each week,

livestock is received and sold at public auction in a sales ring where

packers and other buyers openly offer competitive price bids. Weighing of the livestock, by employees of the auction market operator,

may either precede or follow the sale negotiation.

The third type of market outlet is made up of some 1,200 packing

plants or packer's buying stations located in all the states. To these

the farmers transport or send their livestock, in small lots, for direct

sale to the packer. The sale price is negotiated on the basis of current market quotations, following which the livestock is weighed by the

packer or his employee to complete the transaction.

From the information presented thus far it will be appreciated that

orderly and equitable marketing of livestock, dependent upon impartial

and accurate weighing of several hundred thousand drafts during the

year, at over 3,000 market outlets, on hundreds of scales, requires

effective and comprehensive regulation of the market scales and their

operation, if each individual producer of livestock is to receive the

benefits of correct weighing and weight recording. This is particularly true because the farmer, unlike the retail purchaser of meat,

generally cannot be present during the weight determination and

because, in case of doubt regarding weight, a draft of livestock

ordinarily cannot be identified and reweighed after it has passed

from the scales to the holding pens containing other livestock. Moreover, livestock is weighed under adverse conditions, because the dead

load on the scale platform changes continuously and necessitates

frequent correction of the zero balance, if the derived weight values of

| livestock loads are to be sufficiently accurate.

It may be said with confidence that at none of the markets supervised by the Department do the actual weighing facilities—the live- stock scales—constitute a problem. No other class of large capacity

scales has better accuracy potentials than the 800 scales which are

I employed at the supervised terminal and auction markets. Each

of these is tested at least twice during each year and each is required

to be accurate within a basic tolerance of 1.5 pounds per thousand.

Moreover, each scale is tested with standard weights to its full working

capacity and at each thousand pound load stage. This is a more

comprehensive and thorough test than is required by other agencies

47
or for other large capacity scales in commercial weighing service.

It is satisfying to be able to inform you that some 80 percent of all the tests conducted under our supervision each year prove the scales

to be within tolerance and, indeed, some 72 percent of the scales are found to be accurate on the occasion of each test made during the

year. It is worthy of comment too that about 70 percent of all scales at our markets are provided with approved-type indicators as aids to correct balancing, elimination of disturbance effects and full visibility of zero or load balance. It has been our experience that

extremely few instances of incorrect weighing are due to deficient

livestock scales. On the contrary, as has been discovered repeatedly

in our investigations, it is the weighing and weight recording practices

of weighers which are responsible for incorrect weight values either

through carelessness or through deliberate intent to defraud.

All of the 66 terminal stockyards in the first-mentioned category of markets and 262 of the 2,100 auction markets in the second category

operate under direct supervision of the Federal Department of Agriculture. No direct supervision is exercised over weighing at packing plants or packer buying stations, although Federal regulations

do provide that "packers shall maintain and operate their livestock

scales so as to insure accurate weights." I shall defer my discussion

of terminal market supervision problems until later and proceed now

to discuss weighing conditions at auction markets and packer plants

under Departmental supervision with special reference to methods for detecting and preventing common faults in weighing service at markets

in those latter groups.

At most auction markets each livestock lot is weighed immediately

after it leaves the sale ring and weighing must be completed rapidly

to prevent congestion and delay in the ring. Although the average

farmer is usually present to watch the bidding on his_ livestock he

seldom observes the weighing, not realizing that the benefit of a favorable sale price is lost if weighing is not performed with care and

impartiality. Incorrect weighing at these markets develops from

the weigher's haste, carelessness or negligence and his consequent

failure to regularly correct the scale zero balance, to allow the weighbeam or dial indicator to attain equilibrium before reading or recording the weight, and to make certain that animals or persons off the

scale are not in contact with the platform stock rack or gates. Aside

from these instances of inadvertent weighing inaccuracies, there are occasional instances when a weigher, although presumably disinterssted in the sale transaction, may be influenced to favor a neighbor,

friend, or relative buying livestock at the auction. It is regrettable too that throughout the livestock marketing industry there prevails an insidious doctrine that, in weighing livestock, the buyer is entitled

to the "break of the beam", a principle which, if permitted to persist,

would work to the injury of the farmer-producer on each draft weighed.

It is also known that some auction market operators, desirous of attracting buyers to their market, intimate that weighing of livestock

will be controlled to favor the buyer, and there is reason to believe

that such operators have instructed their weighers accordingly.

Weighing at packer establishments, because there is less need for rapid operation of the scales, is less subject to negligence and careless- ness in zero balancing and in weight determination. Moreover, the

farmer or his representative may be present during the weighing.

However, because the weight determination is made by the packer or 48
by his agent and because the average farmer is not familiar will) scale

operation, there are ever present opportunities for taking advantage

of the latter. One method observed is to balance the empty scale with the weighbeam at the bottom of the trig loop and balance the

load with the beam at the top, a manipulation which can deprive the

farmer of ten pounds of weight. Another method, less common but

equally effective with type-registering weighbeams, is to insert the

ticket in the poise slot before balancing the load, a manipulation

which also causes light weight indication and record.

The core of the Department's weighing supervision functions is a

rigid code of weighing instructions which each weigher of livestock is required to observe and which specifies in full detail requirements for balancing, for weighing, for weight recording and for careful and

impartial performance of all duties. Special agents of the Department

make occasional undisclosed observations of weighing to ascertain if weighers violate instructions. When deliberate fraud- is suspected a previously weighed lot of livestock may be consigned to a market aad

the sale weight will be compared with the previously obtained true weight. Where conditions are favorable, a surprise visit to a market

for check-weighing of livestock already weighed may be arranged.

When evidence of fraud is obtained formal action is taken against

market operators or packers and they are required to discharge the

weighers involved. For first offenses or where violations are inadvertent, weighers and their employers are warned, instructed and

placed on notice that they will be prosecuted for future lapses.

It is at the terminal markets where the bulk of the nation's live- stock is marketed that problems of weighing supervision and control

require special attention. This is due, in pare, to the fact that as many as 30 scales may be in operation at one time and, in part, to the

fact that livestock speculators who patronize these markets include some unscrupulous individuals who may seek to influence weighers to favor them either by light-weighing their livestock purchases or by

over-weighing their livestock sales. Weighers at these markets, pur- suant to regulations, are rotated from scale to scale at regular intervals

to prevent developments of close relations with parties buying and

selling livestock and various other means are taken to insure impartiality in weighing service. Despite these precautions, however, it has happened occasionally that a weigher and a speculator conspire

to defraud a buyer or seller of livestock by incorrectly recording the , weight of a livestock draft. Usually this is accomplished by the

weigher moving the poise of a type-registering weighbeam to the

position he desires before printing the scale ticket. Because the information will illustrate the manner and degree in which livestock weighing fraud may be perpetrated unless appropriate measures of surveillance, detection and investigation are employed, I may now describe the results of a major investigation program which we were obliged to conduct during the past three }^ears to discover

and eliminate an organized conspiracy of fraudulent livestock weighing at one terminal market where fraudulent weighing constituted a

million-dollar-a-year

' 'racket ' '

.

At this market, there was reason to believe, certain weighers were

habitually issuing scale tickets bearing false weight values to favor

speculators selling livestock to packers. Since detection and proof of the practice could not be accomplished by ordinary measures it was

necessary, with the cooperation of the stockyard officials, to install. 49
unknown to the weigher or to others, special devices to record secretly

the true weight of each livestock draft. At the end of each week the

weights recorded by the device were compared with the weights registered by the weigher on scale tickets and the differences recorded and

analyzed. The results of some typical data will now be shown to you, and I commend them to your study for they represent datq

which you have not seen before, a realistic record of what may transpire in a scale house when a weigher is alone with his conscience.

As a result of the information developed by the investigation, all weighers involved were discharged, the conspiring speculators were

barred from the market and formal administrative action was taken

to prevent their continued operation. I may also assure you that measures have been taken to prevent development of similar conspiracies at other markets.

The instances of incorrect weighing which have been described or

illustrated represent extreme examples and are by no means generally

typical. It would be incorrect and unfair to suppose that careless or prejudiced weighers compose a majority, that most market operators

or packers are dishonest or that all speculators are without sound

trading ethics. Nevertheless, as examples of conditions which could

develop in the absence of effective supervision they illustrate why

state and local weights and measures officials should not be content

simply to test livestock scales but also should adopt measures for making certain that weighing is performed correctly.

(At appropriate points in his discussion Mr. Richard showed and explained

several lantern slides of charts which demonstrated the actual performance of individual weighers at livestock markets.)

PROBLEMS IN LIVESTOCK WEIGHING

By R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, Weights and Measures Section, Department of Agriculture and Immigration, State of Virginia

I feel that the livestock weighing problem is equally as much a

State and local responsibility as it is a Federal problem.

Since the beginning of the local or country livestock auction market some twenty-five years ago, there has been a rapid and widespread

growth of these facilities throughout the nation. The livestock

industry itself has become a major one, producing, from meat and

meat animals, 29 percent of the national farm income in 1951. This

amounted to 11 billion, 308 million dollars. A large percentage of the livestock which at one time moved through

terminal markets is now being bought by packers at country markets.

As Mr. Richard has told you, the United States Department of Agriculture has supervision over a limited number of the auction

markets.

This leaves the responsibility for correct scales and proper weighing

practices at most markets with the State and local governments.

Inasmuch as weights and measures enforcement at the State level, in a majority of States, is vested in ^departments of agriculture, it would seem only, natural that the weighing at auction markets would

receive the attention which it merits.

Attention has been given auction markets in Virginia for a considerable number of years, during which we have provided State weighmasters on a voluntary basis at some auction markets. This method

has been satisfactory and has, we feel, rendered a valuable service. 50
However, it is certainly not the complete solution to the problem.

During the past two years, we have done considerable check-weighing

at auction markets. When this was first started, some rather amazing

results were brought to light.

Livestock at auction markets in Virginia and in many southern

States is sold on a basis of "in weights." A normal shrinkage is to be expected, and buyers make their purchases with this in mind. On

a 200-pound veal calf, for instance, the anticipated shrink in a period

of eight hours would be approximately 8 pounds. Most of this shrink

takes place in the first three or four hours. We have established this figure by check-weighing a number of pens of veal calves at various

markets. In some markets, we found the shrinkage as low as % of a pound in 8 hours, and, in at least two instances, a gain was noted

rather than the normally anticipated shrink. This resulted in the

Commissioner of Agriculture revoking the license of one market, and

in a lengthy court case, on which we have not yet received a verdict.

I want to mention here the splendid cooperation and assistance

which we receive from the Packers and Stockyards Division of the

U. S. Department of Agriculture. For a number of years, we have

tested the scales under their supervision, both at auction markets and

packing plants, forwarding scale test reports to them. When we

needed help with this particular situation, they came through. Mr.

D. L. Bowman of their staff observed the weighing in an undercover

capacity, and both he and Mr. Richard were key witnesses in our

court case. Cooperation among Federal, State, and local officials will help solve many similar problems.

Regardless of how the court case turns out, weighing practices at the majority of Virginia markets certainly have improved, and recent checks show little cause for criticism. Our men, in some instances, only recheck individual animals

which have just been weighed, or check on scale balance, the use of

loose balance materials, and other common infractions which may be

found.

You may inquire as to the incentive to short -weigh of an auction

market, which operates on a commission basis. The answer is that

pressure .from buyers to hold shrink down and thus increase the

dressing yield is more or less common and constant. If one market

yields to this pressure and short -weighs calves, for instance, 5 to 10

pounds, it will be able to get a better price per pound, which will attract producer trade. Competing markets who may want to operate

honestly are more or less forced to follow the same line in order to meet competition.

Declining prices on cattle provide a further incentive to the buyer

who may seek short-weight as a means of insuring his profit against

another drop in the market. The producer is caught in the squeeze

between falling prices and short-weight practices.

Mr. Richard has termed their findings in one large terminal market

as a million-dollar racket. Similar rackets over the entire country

would run into many millions.

We, as weights and measures officials, often come here and quibble over problems of popcorn and popsicle proportions and insist on

M-ounce graduations on prepackaging food scales, yet we permit

livestock, such as individual veal calves, lambs, and hogs, to be

weighed over scales with a 5-pound minimum graduation. Admittedly, the 5-pound graduation on livestock scales is well established

51
and may be satisfactory for weighing large drafts of animals However, on individual animals in the lighter weights, such as lambs, veal,

and hogs, a 1-pound graduation would certainly seem essential. I feel that those of us who are agriculturally minded should give this serious consideration, and make an effort to bring such a change into

practice.

While it is my understanding that, in a large part of the United

States, livestock is sold at auction on "out weights" rather than "in

weights," the opportunity and incentive for fraud still exists, and the

problem of correct weighing remains of importance.

The testing of scales of all kinds is an important and worthwhile

part of our service. Yet, if We permit these correct scales to be used

fraudulently, we are not accomplishing the results for which our re- spective agencies are created and supported. We must not forget

that the producer and intermediate handlers, as well as the ultimate

consumer, pay their share of the tax load.

It would appear highly desirable to try to bring the weighing at these markets out into the light, where it could be observed by all interested parties. The scale houses should be so constructed that

the weighmaster could be observed by both producers and buyers.

It should also be constructed so that the weighmaster can see both

ends of the stock rack on the scale. The use of type-registering weighbeams and balance indicators or automatic-weight recorders should be encouraged. Signs might well

be posted encouraging the interested parties to observe the weighing.

Just how much of this should be done by regulation and how much

by persuasion or salesmanship, I am not prepared to say. However,

it presents a challenge which should be met on the State level in the manner which seems most appropriate.

In my opinion, the problem of livestock weighing is one that merits

the careful attention of every State department of weights and measures in the nation.

Mr. Battcom: You spoke of the voluntary weighmaster program;

I would like to hear more of that activit}^.

Mr. Thompson: Our plan has been to furnish weighmasters who

are on the State payroll to such markets as request them and reimburse the State for their salaries. The State charges the market a

certain amount per day for the services of each man. We feel that

we have better control over the men who actually are on the State

payroll than we have over those who are merely licensed by the State. As I mentioned in my paper, we do not believe that this completely answers the problem, since it is operated on a voluntary basis. Since

the program is voluntary, it might possibly be participated in only

by those markets who are particularly anxious to do an honest job.

ELECTRONIC SCALES

By George F. Graham, Assistant Director of Sales, Streeter-Amet Company,

Chicago, Illinois The electronic or load-cell scale is relatively a newcomer in the field of weight determination. However, the wide variety of applications

that have been made using these interesting instruments attests its versatility, accuracy, and dependability.

A survey of actual applications demonstrates that, when properly

applied and correctly maintained, load-cell determination has an 52
accuracy well within the order of magnitude of the tolerances recom- mended by the National Conference on Weights and Measures. The

high degree of adaptability inherent in electromechanical load-cell systems enhances their merit for many difficult installations. Like all other careful processes, certain safeguards and preferential practices

should be adhered to if good performance is to result.

It is not within the province of this paper to discuss basic concepts

of electronic systems nor to dwell on many of the more technical

aspects of these devices. However, before entering into discussion of individual applications, certain comments appear to be in order.

Electronic or load-cell systems for weight determination are suit- able for either commercial or industrial applications.

There have been a wide variety of load-cell weighing installations.

Some of them are of commercial nature; a much larger number have

been sold for other industrial applications where the tolerances and

specifications set forth in Handbook 44 do not apply. Examples of these would be certain crane scales, hopper scales, or other installa- tions where the scale was not being used in trade, but only for intraplant operations. The accuracies and characteristics of these scales should not be confused with a load-cell scale that has been sold and

installed for commercial applications.

Load-cell systems have been applied to nearly every type of weighing problem that is suitable for conventional scale systems. A sizeable

number of applications have been made that would be very difficult to accomplish with lever-type units. Many times, the small space

required of load cells, as compared with the large space requirements

of levers, is very advantageous.

Railway track scales lend themselves to the new type of installations, since, wherever very heavy capacity scales are involved, the

load cell offers definite economic advantages.

High speed weighing of motor trucks is becoming prominent as an adjunct in highway weight control. In this field, the load-cell instrument presently appears to be predominant.

Because of their relatively small size, and remote recording features,

load-cell crane scales are becoming very popular, and seem to fill a void that formerly existed in weight determination.

Tank and hopper scales are a natural application for the load cell. The cell works equally well in tension or compression, and the installa- tion of cells usually presents fewer problems than any other type of

load- or weight-determining system.

Testing methods are similar to those normally used for conventional units. The best way to test any scale is to load the weighbridge or other load-receiving element with successively increasing

small increments of weight, and determine if the response of the

weight-determining instrument is correct. As is the case with lever mechanisms, corner tests of load platforms,

center and section tests should be made, and tests of the sensitivity

and repeatability should not be neglected. - In passing, it should be

noted that the sensitivity of load-cell units is usually very good.

Load-cell instruments are peculiarly adapted to control other

functions, such as batching, computing operations, or any operation

that is desirable to control by weight. The weight information is already in the form of electrical values, and, as such, is readily usable.

Further, since most load-cell systems have, as an integral portion

thereof, servo systems capable of accepting a signal from the cell and

53
using it with the application of a desired amount of power, a freedom

of operation exists that is not inherent in the lever systems where all the power used to perform work or extra functions must be subtracted

from the weighbeam and, to that extent, introduce possibility of error. Remote recording is inherent in most electronic systems. Fullfigure printing is available with load-cell systems.

Temperature changes within normal operating limits do not affect the load cells adversely.

Unfortunately, there has been some confusion in connection with

load-cell scales with regard to the presence of temperature sensitivity

and zero drift. In many applications, these features are either of no

great importance or may be eliminated; therefore, many noncommercial scales have been sold and have been in operation for years that

do show a marked temperature sensitivity and zero drift. However,

a load-cell scale that is installed for commercial applications should

be expected to maintain good weighing characteristics over all normal

operating temperatures. Also, its zero-drift characteristics should be

negligible. Normally, these would not be more than those encountered by the accumulation of dirt on a conventional truck or any

other platform-type scale. A load-cell scale is a precision mechanism. Overload or abuse can

hurt these scales, as well as the conventional mechanical units.

It should be remembered that the load-cell scale is affected by poor

weighbridges, binds, bad installation, misalinement, poor fittings, etc., in exactly the same manner as a mechanical system. In certain

load-cell applications, errors arising from causes exclusive of the load

cell and connected recording s}7stems are responsible for errors accredited to the new weighing methods.

While load-cell scales generally can be furnished to conform to performance specifications and to meet the requirements of normal

commercial operation, there are design specifications or design considerations that have been incorporated into purchasing or acceptance

specifications that do not cover the field of load-cell scales or are not

applicable thereto. For instance, it means little to a load-cell scale that the allowable pivot or bearing load is 5,000 pounds per linear inch, or that the main levers must clear the bottom of the pit by so many

inches. On the other hand, those portions of the specifications per- taining to tolerances, type of deck, type of construction, clearances,

checking members, etc., are in most cases applicable in either lever

systems or load-cell scales. This would indicate that careful consideration should be given to the possible revision of existing specifications with an emphasis towards broader application and in- terpretation, but without reducing many characteristics that are

desirable for an operating or performance consideration.

Tare provision, multiple ranges or drop weights, zero adjustments,

etc., can all be accomplished by load-cell systems.

Visual indicators and/or printers usually are incorporated in the new units. Whereas, earlier load-cell units were of manual-balance type,

most modern types are of the automatic servo variety. Among the

earliest type of load-cell applications, are to be found manually

balanced systems for determining load on aircraft axles, tankweighing systems, material-testing units, platform scales, and 'crane

scales.

54
An understanding of the application limitations and advantages of load cells presupposes a general understanding of the method of

operation involved. Many varieties of load cells have been developed.

These are capable of a varying degree of accuracy; therefore, applications should be made with the limitations or peculiar advantages of

the particular type of cell in mind.

Generally speaking, there are available hydraulic load cells of several varieties which can operate visual indicators directly or, in connection with electrical components, control printers, or remote

functions. These comments apply equally to the pneumatic type of load cell. Certain technical people have high regard for these two

types of transducers. Material-testing machines have been developed

around the use of hydraulic and/or pneumatic functions usually in connection with some form of electric actuating circuitry.

A wide variety of electrical or mechanical-electrical transducers

are on the market. The fundamental concepts of the several types are

of considerable interest, and all weights and measures men will undoubtedly familiarize themselves sooner or later with the several

systems and their practical and theoretical advantages and/or

limitations.

In brief, most systems consist of a load-receiving element which

is so designed that an electrical signal proportional to applied weight

is created. Some transducers generate sufficient signal strength to control indicating mechanism without amplification. Others generate a signal strength requiring a high degree of amplification. The

signal developed by the transducer or load cell is used to operate a balancing component, so that, when a steady state is reached, the

system is in balance. At this steady-state position, weight indicating

or recording is effected. A few of the more typical installations which have been made with

systems not based on the use of levers include railway track scales,

platform scales, high-speed truck scales, tank and hopper scales, and

crane scales. These units all comply with the fundamental requisite of any

weight -determining device. In appearance, they may be vastly

different, and, in fact, the flexibility of use and application may be,

and usually is, dissimilar. However, tolerance specification, methods

of testing stability, and readability all follow the pattern of conventional units.

It should be emphasized that the newest and the latest type of

load-cell scales are completely different in design, construction, and

accuracy than many of the earlier ones. Therefore, the present

scales should not be judged by facts and rumors about scales that

have been in service for some time or that have been sold for industrial

applications.

While on the subject of testing, it might be well to state that the

best way to test any scale seems to be to load it in reasonable increments to full capacity. No good short cuts seem to apply either to electronic or lever devices.

One interesting feature that should be mentioned with regard to electronic scales is that one instrument (recorder or visual indicator) can serve more than one load unit or scale. The recorder is simply

switched from one scale to another, electrically. Or, it is equally

possible to have several scales, not mechanically connected, working

55
as a integrated weighing device, with a single recorder. Many

electronic recorders are full-figure printers, and, of course, are entitled

to the extra tolerance allowance of 1/2 minimum graduation.

Summarizing, the applications of electronic units have proven

somewhat more flexible and equally as accurate and dependable as lever scales. They require, in most instances, only a reasonable

degree of maintenance, and can, under certain circumstances, function

well where conventional systems fail. This new type of device is suitable for many problems of weight

determination difficult to solve with levers. Testing procedures are substantially identical with present practices.

()Ir. Graham showed and explained a number of lantern slides depicting var- ious components and installations of electronic scales.) (The Conference was adjourned, to reconvene at 10:00 a. m., Thursday,

May 21, 1953.) (During the afternoon of Wednesday, May 20, informal tours of the laboratories of the National Bureau of Standards were participated in by the delegates.)

(On the evening of Wednesday, May 20, an informal party was held at the Wardman Park Hotel, the Conference headquarters, for those attending the

Conference.)

FOURTH SESSION—MORNING OF THURSDAY, MAY 22, 1953

(J. Fred Tri e, Vice President, Presiding)

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

EDUCATION, PRESENTED BY CHARLES MORRIS FULLER,

CHAIRMAN

Your Committee on Weights and Measures Education has enjoyed

a year of contacts with a typical cross section of weights and measures

officials, located in all parts of the country. These officials were

selected mostly from those who were cooperative when we made

our previous study on budgetary procedures.

The idea of developing a training and study coarse, based on handbooks issued by the National Bureau of Standards is not a new one.

It has been discussed over the years. Certain things, however, had

to be given due consideration. The preparation of a book or manual

for the course would be a full time assignment for some highly

qualified person. The National Bureau of Standards already has issued many valuable publications for the purpose of disseminating authentic information and promoting uniformity in weights and measures enforcement.

We felt, therefore, that it would be the logical agency for the job.

Mr. W. S. Bussey, Chief of the Office of Weights and Measures,

stated that, if a training and study course would be of real value, his

office might be willing to undertake the project. They would have to be convinced beyond any reasonable doubt that there is an actual

demand and need for such a course. It would be of little value unless

the department heads really used it and followed up with thorough

examinations. It would have to be used extensivelv if the effort and

expense were to be justified.

This explains why one hundred of you received personal letters requesting your frank opinions on the subject. 1 Your answers to the letters speak well for the caliber of men who are engaged in this essential work of protecting the American public.

56
They evidence careful study, thought, and interest. We were able

to understand just how useful the proposed course would be in your

jurisdictions, and your reasons for arriving at those conclusions.

The majority of answers agreed that the idea, itself, is good: "a

manual as proposed would bs of invaluable assistance";—-"a very

fine thing, especially for some States where the personnel are not able

to attend meetings or participate in the National Conference";—'"one

of the best ideas that has been advanced in weights and measures in

quite some time";—"would be especially valuable in States having

relatively new weights and measures laws";—"could be used by new

inspectors during their training period, or by old inspectors to refresh

themselves on methods of technique";—"both practical and worthwhile and there should be a big demand for such a course" ; —"would be

a forward step";—"great possibilities if presented right";—-"a course covering the rudiments and functional experiences of all devices that

officials come in contact with, is needed very badly."

A general feeling was expressed that the manual should be clear

and concise; written in plain, simple language without too many

technical terms; and "with short, meaty chapters followed by

questions."

Emphasis was placed on the part that the National Bureau of Standards should take: "definitely of the opinion that the NBS in

Washington is the only Bureau in a position to put such a project

into effect";—"would be accepted by a large number of weights and

measures officials";—"the more it approached the nature of a cor- respondence course with a series of examinations composed and

preferably graded by one person or group to be designated by the

National Bureau, the more effective and valuable it would become."

An opposite view regarding examinations was taken by one official, who said, "While I believe most of our local inspectors would study

the manuals, I am afraid many- of them would endeavor to side-step

examinations. Speaking for myself, I have taken several Stat 3 merit

examinations and, as a result, have gotten to the place where they

prove distasteful to me. The reason may be attributed to unnecessary

worrying prior to the examination. I mention unnecessary worrying,

due to the fact that I have never met with any difficulty in making

satisfactory grades."

Another suggestion was made that the course should be slanted

at career supervisors who would be the trainers for the inspectors

working in their departments. In this case, it would be assumed

that the supervisor had a basic knowledge of weights and measures when he was promoted. The course would include information from

the Bureau on the technical aspects of the work; such as modern methods, short cuts, and new formulas for testing. It would develop

his skill in leadership, in improving work methods, and in teaching

others. Emphasis would be given to his responsibilities to his subordinates, superiors, the consumer public, and the vendor, including

the sellers of weighing and measuring equipment. As a part of this course, there would be classroom instruction of two or three weeks'

duration, conducted by the National Bureau of Standards in Washington, D. C, the expense of travel and per diem to be borne by the

jurisdiction involved. "This would be a bold step and could be ac- complished only through proper selling contact on the part of Bureau

representatives, assisted by those of us in the field who subscribe to the program."

269870—

i

53 57
Civil Service Commissions would welcome an authoritative manual

as an aid to them in setting up examination procedure. It also

would answer the question as to where men interested in taking civil service examinations could gain a comprehensive insight into the

work entailed.

Up to this point, we have concentrated on the educational value of

the proposed manual and course of instruction. Equal consideration

must be given to the practical side. Would it be used enough to

justif3r the effort and expense involved in preparing it ? Your Committee has not forgotten that several years ago it labored to prepare a comprehensive list of questions and answers covering the field of weights and measures operations. The comparatively small number

of requests for copies was very discouraging.

Undoubtedly, the use of the course would be affected by the

probable tenure in office of the officials and inspectors—-whether they

are career men under civil service, or political appointees who hold

the position for only a short time. In some places they are appointed

from year to year and could not be expected to take much interest

in an educational program.

Half of the officials who believe that it is a good idea expressed

themselves as doubtful if it would be widely used. Here are some of their comments:

There is already existent in Handbooks 37 and 45 about all the fundamental

knowledge that can be contained in printed form. Frankly, I am doubtful as

to whether or not it would be utilized to a sufficient degree.—(Head of a

leading State department who has also had maiw years of experience on

Conference committees.)

It is my honest opinion that very few departments would use a publication

of this type unless their program and budget included a trainee program. —(Head of a large and progressive county department.)

I have reason to question the end result value of such an extensive effort. The splendid material which is now available provides adequate information. —(Head of one of our largest city departments who has also had much

committee experience.)

Definitely a waste of time. The majority of officials do not care to spend

too much time studying.—(No beating about the bush by this State chief.) (Another head in a large State also was outspoken.) —I would not want

to be committed to the use of such a training course. In fact, I wonder if any

of them would even bother to go through an extension course that would

require any of their own time, and I wonder if we would be criticized for taking time for such study while in the employment of a governmental

agency.

(This State chief sums up his opinion as follows:) —-There is a definite need

for the training of weights and measures enforcement officers throughout the United States, but, until such time as the persons who are engaged in this work feel the need for such education in order that they may perform a better

service, the creation of a training program may be labor lost. We have too many persons who are well satisfied with their present inadequate efforts, or who have accepted the position as a weights and measures enforcement

officer and are carrying out the work following what might be given as a rude

description, "following the lines of least resistance." To get adults employed by cities, counties, and States interested enough

in their work and future to put in the extra time necessary to accomplish

such a course would be a miracle.—(The breezy comment of a State chief.) Frankly, I feel that at the present time, the response would not be any

greater than it was for the list of questions and answers.—(A veteran of many years as a State leader.) Other heads of large city departments had this to say: "Enthusiastic about the idea, but doubtful about the use. How much of a demand there would be, I cannot say."—' 'The work and expense

would not be justified. Both handbooks issued by the National

58
Bureau of Standards are adequate. Good judgment and common

sense, plus the instructions contained in the handbooks, should be

sufficient to enable the official to perform his duties satisfactorily."—

"My honest opinion is that it would not be worth the time or effort demanded for such an undertaking."—"This is to express my objective doubts about the project. The proposed manual would not be

widely and properly used by most officials." We could go on and quote many similar expressions. It should also be noted that 29 percent of the total number did not even answer the

letters which were personally written them. This negative response

would seem to indicate a total lack of interest in the project, so far as they are concerned.

On the other hand, we were assured by 27 percent of those contacted

that they would definitely use the course in their own jurisdictions:

I wish to assure you that such a manual would be used by this division. Any arguments which might be advanced with regard to the non-use of the manual might very well have been advanced against the other publications

referred to in your letter. I think now that NBS Handbooks have been

published and put to good use; we all can agree that they have proven of great benefit and. that it would be extremely difficult to get along without

them. Undoubtedly, the result would be the same if the proposed manual

is written and published.—(The chief in a large midwestern State.)

I will see to it that everyone of our inspectors takes advantage of this opportunity if favorable action is taken on the proposition. The benefits obtained by the people and the inspectors will be greater than anything

attempted to improve and make weights and measures inspection uniform

throughout the United States.—(An active southern State.) As far as this department is concerned, it would be accepted, and we have

about 50 State sealers of weights and measures.—(Another large midwestern

State.)

I heartily endorse the idea and will certainly use it in this office.—(A

southern city.) I asked my deputies how many would be willing to attend a course of this kind on their own time, and their answer was a unanimous "yes."—(A

western county.)

We could continue with more opinions, both for and against the

project. The foregoing, however, gives you a pretty complete picture.

Your Committee believes that the proposed handbook or manual

would be a valuable addition to our present textbooks. It would pro- vide the means for a training and study course. It would promote

uniformity in enforcement. But it probably would be used by not more than one out of four officials and inspectors.

These facts are submitted without further comment. The final decision about undertaking the job must be made by the National

Bureau of Standards.

Your Committee prepared another questionnaire which had to do

with assistance by the National Bureau of Standards to weights and

measures officials. Copies of this were sent to all officials who answered

our first letter. Some of the desired services are as follows

:

1. Provide field personnel to work, in an advisory capacity, with

State and larger local jurisdictions. These men should be qualified

to instruct and demonstrate proper methods of testing any weighing

or measuring device.

2. Make surveys and offer suggestions for improving the service ia the different States.

3. Encourage ownership and use of NBS Handbooks.

4. Increase attendance at the National Conference by aiding offi- cials to get authorization and support of their governing bodies.

59
5. More promptness in calibration of standards submitted to the

' Bureau.

6. Develop an approval seal with good adhesive and non-fading

qualities.

7. Establish a clearinghouse for interstate problems and complaints.

8. Encourage the organizing and expanding of State and regional

associations and conferences.

9. A continuous stud}7 of current conditions, with the ratio of per- sonnel to population in mind. This information to be issued in bulletins to aid officials in obtaining adequate personnel and equipment.

10. Put on a two- or three-day meeting in each State that would

tell the complete story of weights and measures work. Demonstrate

methods of testing with actual equipment. A federal exhibit to be

used at State fairs would be valuable.

11. Stimulate the various departments by a survey and evaluation

of their work. Issue certificates of approval where deserved.

12. Set up an experimental school at State and local conferences

where the inspectors would make actual tests of both old and new

equipment. They would then make out inspection sheets showing

why the equipment was either sealed or condemned. These sheets

would be collected and graded by the National Bureau of Standards.

13. A training course for sealers of weights and measures.

14. Expand program of railroad track scale testing. Notify the

sealers far enough in advance so that they could plan to be present

at tests. 15. Encourage the Federal Education System to prepare and dis- tribute (especially to schools) movies showing the value and necessity

of this work. Also a film for weights and measures personnel.

16. A consumers' educational program aimed at the housewife.

17. Impress on State officials the importance of revising and bringup to date, annually, their specifications and tolerances.

18. Increased effort in promoting, through letters and personal

visits to key members of State legislatures, the creation of weights

and measures laws, and the setting up of weights and measures departments in those States that do not have such laws or departments.

19. Encourage the enforcement of current weights and measures

laws in the respective States, as well as suggesting additional laws of a uniform nature concerning subject matters that are common to interstate exchange.

Everybody was unanimous in desiring the Bureau to continue all of its present services without any curtailment.

Among the subjects which officials would like to have presented at State conferences by staff members, are many relating to the Bureau,

itself, such as: organization and functions, services offered, current programs, accomplishments and objectives of the National Conference, illustrated talks on material in the NBS Handbooks. Staff members could preside over panels or discussion groups on problems

of field inspectors; the proper relationship of the inspector to repairmen; unusual problems encountered and methods devised to correct conditions or violations ; and current problems as they come up from

| time to time, such as liquefied petroleum gas and farm milk tanks.

If possible, talks should be applicable to weights and measures problems or interests of the localit}7 represented by the conference.

Staff members would be in a position to tell about the progress

achieved in various jurisdictions and what the other States are doing,

60
so that the delegates could benefit by experiences and methods that

had proved successful elsewhere. Talks should be practical, not

technical, and presented with visual aids whenever possible.

The development of electronic scales is a timely suggestion. The

sale of ice cream by net weight is still a live issue, as is the consideration of other commodities sold in an improper manner, such as pickles

and pickle products by liquid measure. More about the metric sys- tem and its adoption is desired.

Detailed methods for the handling and inspection of prepackaged

commodities would be a welcome subject that would arouse much

discussion. Many officials stressed the importance of talks that

would promote uniformity, both in testing and inspection methods,

and in specifications and tolerances.

Judging by the requests received, the Bureau will need an added

budget appropriation for publications and printed matter. The offi- cials would like to see the Monthly News Letter revived. They

would like bulletins covering the latest types of testing equipment,

with plans and specifications ; bulletins on new kinds of weighing and

measuring devices, with approved methods of testing same; an annual

list of all sealers in the United States; an up-to-date glossary of scale,

pump, and meter terms; and a digest of complicated court cases. Handbooks could be revised and enlarged to include specifications

and tolerances, as well as questions and answers, chapter by chapter

for H37 and H45, and code by code for H44. Booklets should be

provided to replace some of those that are out of print; for example,

Circular 3, "Design and Test of Standards of Mass." A manual for new or untrained inspectors is needed. This could be similar to those

used in Canada to prepare an applicant for taking an examination for inspector. It should not be as technical as the handbooks, but would

explain proper methods, of doing a correct job. A series of press

releases, perhaps one every week, would stimulate the interest of the

public.

The last suggestion hits at a vital problem—how to awaken the

interest of the people to the importance of getting full weight and

full measure for their mone}^. It is a paradox that at this time, when

prices are at an all-time high, the buying habits of so many are at an

all-time low.

Most of you read the article, "Ask the Price! Watch that Scale!"

which appeared in Good Housekeeping magazine a couple of years

ago. The editors of this national publication felt that this was a

subject of more than passing concern. After consulting the Office of Weights and Measures at the National Bureau of Standards, they

sent a staff writer, Elsie McCormick, from one end of the country

to the other, meeting officials and gathering facts from her own

observation.

When the article finally was written, it had a subheading which

asked the pertinent question, "Would you like to reduce your

present food bills by 6 percent without cutting down either the quality

or quantity of your provisions?" She estimated that American

women lost over a billion dollars a year in not being efficient food

shoppers—in failing, mostly through carelessness and indifference,

to get full weight for their money.

It was written in an entertaining manner and related many interesting episodes to illustrate the conclusions reached. But how many of the three million subscribers to Good Housekeeping (and several

61
times that number of readers) remember those facts today? What

is more important, how many put into practice the suggestions offered

that would result in saving real money for the family budget ? Nothing can take the place of personal contacts through the medium

of speaking engagements. From personal experience, gained during

the past few years by delivering an address, "How to be a Smart

Buyer," before nearly three hundred women's clubs, men's service

clubs, and other organizations, the Chairman of this Committee has

had the opportunity of learning their value. The results obtained

have been more than worth the time, effort, and night work required.

There must be an actual demand from the people, themselves, if we are to have improved weights and measures conditions. Many

years ago, the National Bureau of Standards made a survey in California. It revealed that short weight, false scales, and tricky practices were costing the consumers huge sums of money. Those facts were

given wide publicity and aroused the people to action. Any time it can be shown that they are being robbed of part of their living by

underhanded methods of short weight and short measure, people are going to demand that something be done about it. A constitutional

amendment, establishing laws and State-wide enforcement was submitted to the voters in California, and passed by an overwhelming

majority.

The Office of Weights and Measures well might consider ways and means of effectively arousing the public, especially in backward States

and communities, to a realization of how much this lack of weights

and measures protection is costing them in dollars and cents. The

establishment of a Speaker's Bureau for this purpose would be a worthy project.

REMARKS OF A. T. McPHERSON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL

BUREAU OF STANDARDS

I We at the National Bureau of Standards are very glad to have the

nineteen suggestions developed by Mr. Fuller and his committee, and

we will give each and every one of them serious consideration. Two

major problems confronting the Bureau necessarily will limit the

amount of service that can be rendered under present circumstances.

One problem is the increasing demand from many quarters for a variety of new standards and additional services, and the other is an

anticipated reduction in appropriations, which is part of the Government-wide action to alleviate the tax burden and balance the

National Budget.

It is gratifying to note, however, that some of the items mentioned

have already been receiving consideration. For example, the calibration of weights is practically current and the backlog of other standards : awaiting calibration has been reduced considerably. Currently the

greatest delay is about six months and is on the calibration of volumetric standards. In the over-all calibration and testing program,

involving about 320,000 items a year the average time at the Bureau

is between one and two months, including the time required to do

the work.

The Bureau welcomes the opportunity to participate in local and regional weights and measures conferences, but participation is limited by the fact that only Mr. Bussey and Mr. Jensen are available

for this activity. In order better to serve the local and regional

62
officials, these men must spend considerable time at the Bureau

keeping in touch with the widely varied work done by 4,800 other

members of the staff so as to bring pertinent new ideas and new

developments to bear on practical problems encountered in the field. One such new development is exemplified by the application of

statistical engineering to the calibration of gasoline pumps. This is described in a paper by Youden and Jensen, which Dr. Youden will

i present later in this Conference.

The small but important problem of a durable seal, mentioned by

Mr. Fuller, probably can be solved through the use of information

developed at the Bureau for another purpose.

As to the Educational Program, the Bureau has made very effective use of motion pictures for presenting the results of its dental research.

Through a series of color film—now five in number—dentists all over the world have been able to see and learn new techniques in- volved in mechanical restoration. A film showing the flow of water

in transparent plastic pipes has greatly aided the acceptance of a plumbing code. Films for training inspectors or for other educational

purposes can readily be developed if financial support can be provided.

The Bureau, of course, is not responsible for the enforcement of current weights and measures laws in the respective States, but

it has lent its encouragement to such enforcement in a very tangible

way through a number of publications, the latest of which is the

Weights and Measures Case Reference Book to which your attention

already has been called. We will be guided by your suggestions and we solicit 3^0111- further

recommendations. Perhaps we shall be able to report to you at the

39th National Conference and describe the progress we have made on

your requests.

TECHNICALITIES IN WEIGHTS AND MEASURES COURT CASES

By J. A. Murphy, Assistant Deputy Attorney General, State of New Jersey

A technicality has been well defined as a microbe which has gotten

into the law and given justice the blind staggers. A technical error or a technical objection is one which does not go to the substance

of the issues or the substantial rights of the parties involved. It is addressed to form rather than substance, but may well constitute the

difference between successful prosecution and failure. Many of

these errors or the grounds for objection arise from carelessness or lack of care in testing or inspection, in preparing complaints for

violations, in preparing for trial and in testifying at trial. How many enforcement officers make a detailed, comprehensive,

and complete report of their investigation or inspection immediately

after it is made and while the details are still fresh in mind? Too

much reliance is placed on memory. In view of the number of in- spections made, there is bound to be some confusion in the facts of some of them. This is a constant place of attack by the trial lawyer.

He will ask for a description of the place. It is a minor matter and

may not be important. Generally it is not, but, if he can lead a witness into contradiction, it is one nail he has driven and will be

used to reflect discredit on other testimony.

Does the report disclose the name of the defendant ? Suppose it is a partnership? What if it is a trade name? Is it a corporation?

If it is not the individual who is responsible, then the wrong person

63
may be named as the defendant and the complaint will be dismissed

by the court . Where was the inspection made and where did the violation occur?

If an inspection is made in Municipality A and it discloses a violation

in Municipality B, the action should be brought in Municipality B

where the cause of action accrues. This has also been a cause for objection and dismissal of complaints for violations. Jurisdiction over the subject matter of a cause of action is very important. It cannot be conferred by the consent of the parties, and, unless the

action is brought in a court which has jurisdiction, the case must be

dismissed. An individual may consent to the jurisdiction of the court over his person, but he may not consent to having a case tried in a

court which has no authority to hear or determine that case. Another source of attack is the sufficiency of the complaint. Most

statutes, in defining an offense, make any one of a number of things a violation of that statute and use the disjunctive term "or" in stating

them. For example, a statute may require the net quantity of the

contents of an article of food in package form to be plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the package. It usually provides

that no person shall distribute or sell or expose for sale, or have in

possession with intent to distribute or sell, any article of food in package form, unless the net quantity of the contents be plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the package in terms of weight,

measure, or numerical count. This statute may be violated in any

one of five ways, distribution, sale, exposure for sale, possession with

intent to distribute, possession with intent to sell. As a general rule,

the offender is in violation of more than one provision. The purpose

of the complaint is to acquaint the offender with the violation for which

he is responsible. Many times the complaint alleges the violation

in the disjunctive. It follows the words of the statute. It is generally true that, in charging a statutory offense, it is sufficient to lay the

charge in the words of the act, without a particular statement of facts

such as will bring the accused within its operation, but it is not

sufficient if the disjunctive term "or" is used. A defendant would

never know whether he was accused of distribution, or of sale, or of

exposure for sale, or of possession. He would not be able to properly

prepare his defense. Such a complaint is too vague and indefinite,

and has, on occasions, been dismissed for this reason. You need not,

however, just pick out one of the provisions and only allege that as a violation. You may allege them all, but you need only prove one. You must, however, change the disjunctive "or" to the conjunctive

"and" in so doing. The general rule is that, where an offense may be

committed by doing one of several things, they may be grouped to- gether by using the conjunctive "and" where "or" occurs in the statute and so charge the defendant with having committed them all, and a conviction may be had on proof of any of these things without proof

of the commission of the others.

Another target of attack in the complaint is the sufficiency of the

allegation in a complaint where the doing of an act without a license

constitutes a violation of a statute. It is not the act itself which

constitutes the violation, but it is the performance of that act without

a license. The complaint must allege not only the act, but also the

fact that the defendant is without a license. Failure to allege the

defendant has no license makes a complaint defective and subject to

64
dismissal. This would appear to be an omission that would seldom

occur, but nevertheless it has happened too frequently.

On many occasions the defendant has been previously convicted of other violations. Most statutes impose a greater penalty for repeated

offenders, but, in order to obtain a judgment for the higher penalty,

the fact of prior conviction should be alleged in the complaint. Failure

to allege such prior conviction has prevented the court from imposing

the greater penalty and has permitted such offenders to get off with

a light one. Where the complaint fails to allege the prior conviction,

objection has been successfully made by counsel to any judgment other

than for a first offense. Many statutes provide for a minimum and maximum monetary

penalty which may be imposed by the court for violation of a statute. The discretion, within those limits, is placed in the court. The complaint, however, should request judgment for the maximum amount;

otherwise, the court will have no opportunity to exercise its discretion.

If the prayer of the complaint is for the minimum, the court will impose only the minimum. The facts of the case may justify a greater

penalty, but the court will be bound by the relief asked.

Another main point of attack is the method of inspection or testing.

This is particularly important, because the judge is not an expert, nor may he even be conversant with weights and measures work.

Especially is this true where anything mechanical is involved and where

technical words are used in explanation. It is also true where new

devices are used. One example is the loadometer which is, as you

know, a wheel-load weigher and is specially adapted to determining

the wheel loads of vehicles on highways. One of the first questions

raised is their accuracy. How were they tested to determine their

accuracy? Where was the vehicle weighed ? Was it on a highway ? What was the grade of the road? Would the grade or angle of the

road cause or increase errors in the device ? How many loadometers were used? Are four more accurate than two? Were they used on both sides of the vehicle or only on one side? Was the vehicle kept

level by chocks or blocks placed under the wheels ? If not, did this

increase the angle so as to cause error? Which loadometers were

used ? How were they identified ? What care was given the devices ? If any reflection can be made on the method of testing, then the

accuracy can seriously be questioned, too. The identification and preservation of evidence is another bone of

contention which is often worried by a lawyer. It is particularly

vulnerable where the evidence has been in the possession of more than one person. An attempt is always* made to show it is not the same. Very pointed and pertinent questions are asked regarding its identity,

its storage, who handled it, and who had access to it, in order to show

that it is not. Identification is very important. It may be made by

the serial number being noted in writing by all parties. A more

accurate method is by using a sticker and having each person who

has had custody initial the sticker. Confusion in identity of the evidence where it has been in the possession of more than one person,

all of whom must testify regarding it, is many times a source of embarrassment, and too often a cause of failure in prosecution.

There is another source of attack which is directed to a basic and

vital part of weights and measures. That is the questionably of

the accuracy of your standards and of the standards used in making

tests in the field. In order to prove a case involving weight, you must

65
show that the weighing was done on scales which were accurate. You

must, therefore, show these scales were tested by standards that are

correct. These working standards, of course, are compared with the

State standards in order to determine their accuracy, and are corrected,

if necessary, so that they are accurate. The question, however, is not

directed to the accuracy of the standards used for the test, but is di- rected to the accuracy of the State standards which were used for

comparison and correction. It is, therefore, necessary for you to show the State standards have been certified as required by the State

statute. All the laws of the States require State standards to be submitted once every certain number of years, generally ten, to the National Bureau of Standards for certification. Have you had occasion

to examine this certification closely? Is it a certification? Is it not

many times only a report? Is this report many times a refusal to

certify rather than a certification? Does it not state many times

that the set of weights submitted does not conform to National Bureau

of Standards specifications for weights of a certain named class in

that a certain weight or weights in that set are in error by more than

the tolerance for the weight or weights of those denominations?

What is the result? There has been a refusal of certification. Refusal not only of the erroneous weights, but also of the correct ones,

for the report is a rejection of the entire set of weights. It is true that

the result of the test with the margin of error is incorporated in the

report. It is true ihat you may compensate for this error in correct- ing your working standards, but the objection is directed to the

failure of certification of the State standards, that they do not comply with the law in that they have not been certified as required by

the law and, therefore, may not be used as a standard of comparison

for the testing and correction of the working standards. It is almost

impossible to explain to, much less convince, a court that this report

of the National Bureau of Standards should be considered as a certi- fication. You may argue that it is only a question of words, but

words are the principal tools of lawyers and judges. They are to lawyers what a scalpel is to a surgeon, or a slide rule to an engineer.

There is a magic in words. A difference in the mere form of words

may make a difference in law. If A lends money to B upon an agree- ment to pay interest of 5 percent, but, if it is not paid promptly, then

he has to pay 6 percent, the 6 percent is invalid as constituting a

penalty. However, if A and B had agreed the interest would be 6

percent, but, if paid promptly, it would be 5 percent, then it would

have been valid.

The State law requires certification and uses that specific term. A set of weights is submitted to the National Bureau of Standards

for certification in conformity with the law, and you receive back a

report. Have you complied with your law? Are your weights certi- fied? Once the questionability of the standards is raised, the procedure is then to attack the care with which they are kept. Where

they are stored; who has access to them; are they under lock and

key; who has the key; where is it kept; are they transported about; were they dropped or damaged in any way? These and numerous

other questions of similar character are interposed if one wedge can

be driven regarding their accuracy.

All of these objections are purely of a technical nature. They do

not go to the merits of the question or the substance of the issues.

66
Yet any one or a number are often sufficient either to dismiss a case

or discredit the evidence and raise the question of its sufficiency with

the end result that the court feels there is not enough certainty in

the proof. Carefulness in inspection and testing, proper identification and preservation of evidence, painstaking preparation and careful analysis all along the way are of greater importance than brilliant presentation because the former insures the latter. Dr. McPhersox: When the legal distinction between reports

and certificates was pointed out during a court case and thus was

brought to the attention of the Bureau, prompt action was taken.

Records of past calibrations of State standards were studied, and,

where they seemed appropriate, supplementary certificates were

issued to give the standards legal validity. In the meantime we re- viewed the statutes of the several States and, guided by the requirements stipulated therein, we now endeavor to prepare documents

which are legally valid.

I would suggest that upon your return to your respective jurisdictions you examine the documents which have been issued by the

Bureau with regard to your standards. If you or your legal advisors

have any suggestions as to revisions, please let us know.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATION, PRESENTED BY

MILES A. NELSON, CHAIRMAN

(Secretaey's Note.—The text of the Model Regulation for Package Marking

Requirements, which was adopted by the Conference, is not included in this publication. Upon request, the full text of the Regulation is available from

the Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards, Washington

25, D. C.) The Committee on Legislation submits this report covering matters

referred to it by the 37th National Conference on Weights and

Measures and other matters from other sources. TOBACCO LABELS

Referred to the Committee by the 37th National Conference was

the question as to whether or not the content indications on Federal

Internal Revenue tax stamps serve adequately to fulfill the Model

Law requirement for net content declarations on packages and cans

of tobacco. The Committee is of the opinion that all packages and

cans of tobacco should bear a plain and conspicuous net weight

declaration. Lender no circumstances should there be any special

privilege granted to the tobacco industry or to any other industry on

the net contents requirement. The Committee not only makes this recommendation with regard to packages of tobacco, but it goes

further by recommending that packages of all commodities be required

to bear a proper net contents declaration.

Your Committee feels that the objective of obtaining a plain and

conspicuous net weight declaration on packages and cans of tobacco

could be attained by a revision of the internal-revenue stamp. Therefore, your Committee recommends that the Secretary of this Conference confer with officials of the Bureau of Internal Revenue and

see what can be done to revise the internal-revenue stamp so that it clearly, plainly, distinctly, and conspicuously indicates the true net weight of containers of tobacco, and report the conclusions to

this Committee.

67
STANDARDIZATION OF PACKAGES

The second matter that was considered by the Committee was

the standardization of packages. This subject was referred to the

Committee by the President of the Conference last year for further

study and report. It has been a subject that has been under

consideration for several years. Your Committee feels that the standardization of packages is a very desirable objective, but it is felt that such an objective cannot

be obtained at too rapid a rate, especially when so many phases

of industry itself cannot seem to agree as to the course that should

be followed. It is thought by the Committee that the proper approach

would be first to attempt to work toward standardization with some

individual phases of industry and that it is still a subject that deserves

further study without any specific recommendation from the Committee at this time. Your Committee recommends that it be allowed

to retain this matter for further study and consideration.

SALE OF PICKLES

The Committee on Legislation was requested to consider the

recommendation that was adopted by the 32nd National Conference in 1946 to the effect that pickles should be sold on a drained net weight

basis, or by numerical count. Your Committee feels that this is a matter for further consideration by the Conference Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities. We have been informed that the

item is on the current agenda of that Committee. We feel that any

action by the Legislation Committee must await further recommendations by the Commodity Committee and subsequent actions by the

Conference.

MODEL REGULATION FOR PACKAGE MARKING REQUIREMENTS

The 37th National Conference tentatively adopted the Model

Regulation for Package Marking Requirements which was offered by

your Committee last year. During the ensuing year, this matter

has been studied by the Committee and no further recommendations on the subject have been received. We believe that this is a regulation

which will serve admirably as a model for State promulgations.

It follows closely the wording of that part of the Federal Food, Drug,

and Cosmetic Act which regulates package marking. Your Committee recommends final adoption of the Model Regulation for

Package Marking Requirements.

LABELING OF CERTAIN PREPACKAGED FOOD COMMODITIES

One other matter in connection with the labeling of certain pre- packaged foods was given considerable thought and study by the

Committee. There seems to be a need for some further information

to be required on such prepackaged food products as cheese, meat,

fish, poultry, meat products, produce, and the like that are packaged

in advance of sale in random, non-standard sizes, either by processor,

distributor, or retailer, and which are offered for sale with the total price indicated on the package.

Several city ordinances and proposed city ordinances on this matter have been referred to the Committee for study. The matter

also has been a subject of discussion at some weights and measures |; conferences and meetings. Some legislation appears desirable to prevent possible misrepresentation or misinterpretation of the unit

68
price, or in computing the total price, when packages bear only the net weight and the total price. The Committee feels that all ordi- nances and regulations, which thus far have been adopted or proposed,

fall short of accomplishing the desired goal.

Your Committee recommends that it be allowed to retain this

matter for extensive study and consideration to the result that

possible amendments to the Model Law may be necessary. The

Committee is desirous of receiving copies of existing and proposed

laws, ordinances, and regulations on this matter, and, in addition,

suggestions from all persons who have possible solutions.

(After general discussion by Mr. Rogers, Mr. Baucom, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Bussey, Mr. Meek, and Mr. Blickley, the Report of the Conference Committee on Legisla- tion was adopted by the Conference. This action included final adoption of the Model Regulation for Package Marking Requirements.)

(Mimeographed copies of the Model State Law on Weights and Measures

can be obtained, upon request, from Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards, Washington 25, D. C.) REMOTE GASOLINE PUMPS

By William B. Johnson, Jr., Manager of Sales, Erie Meter Systems, Inc., Erie, Pennsylvania

Last year at the 37th National Conference, the remote control

gasoline dispensing system was an important subject, as a number of

such installations had been made in many parts of the country, and

there was a question in the minds of some weights and measures

officials as to whether such systems would dispense gasoline and

meet the accuracy requirements.

Actually, remote control systems are not new. They have been

used for many years in limited quantity. Those systems used a

gear or vane type pumping unit with air-eliminator chamber installed near the underground tank. In some cases, the air eliminator was

installed in the dispenser cabinet on the island. This required a return line from the air eliminator back to the underground storage

tank.

Due to the change in characteristics of gasoline made to accomodate

the present day automobile, it is necessary to install the gasoline

pump near, or the remote control pumping unit in or near, the underground storage tank, in order to dispense gasoline satisfactorily. The

recent trend toward larger service-station serving areas is a strong

influence in the use of remote control pumps, as it is easier to push

gasoline long distances than it is to pull it. It is also difficult to pull

gasoline at high altitudes and in extremely hot locations; therefore,

the push system or remote control system is the most satisfactory in

such places.

A year ago, only one gasoline pump manufacturer had advertised

to any extent a remote control system. That company was the

Erie Meter Systems, with which I am affiliated. Our system featured

a submerged turbine pump with built-in air eliminator, in order to dispense gasoline within the tolerances. During the past year, several

pump manufacturers have announced similar systems, some using

submerged pumps, others using positive or gear type pumping units.

The increase in use of remote control systems is, I am sure, re- sponsible for my being on your program today, as your association

officials feel that you should be familiarized with this new system in

order to better perform your jobs.

69
IMPORTANT FEATURES OF THE REMOTE CONTROL SYSTEM

1. The proper elimination of air from the system is very important

to maintain accurate measure. Air eliminators installed in or near

the tank, or in the dispenser on the island, will perform this function

satisfactorily. The air eliminator must have sufficient capacity to take care of empty tank conditions.

2. The system must be kept full of gasoline at all times through

the use of check valves or foot valves.

3. Provision for relief of pressure built up due to the expansion of

gasoline when temperature increases is very necessary.

So that you can visualize just how a remote control gasoline dis- pensing system operates in comparison with the conventional gasoline

pump, I have prepared two charts which contain the principal features

of the systems.

The conventional gasoline pump contains a motor-operated pumping

unit with air eliminator which pulls the gasoline from the storage

tank through a pipe which extends from the inlet side of the pumping

unit to the bottom of the storage tank. In order for this system to work well, it is necessary to have a valve in the pipe line which keeps

the entire system full of gasoline at all times. The valve can be either a foot valve located on the end of the pipe in the bottom of the tank, or it can be a check valve in the line directly above the tank, or it can

be a vertical check valve located in the pump cabinet directly below

the pumping unit. After the pumping unit pulls the gasoline from the

underground storage tank, it pushes the gasoline through the meter,

recording the quantity dispensed in both quantity and value.

The pumping unit in the remote control system is located in the

tank, or near the tank, and pushes the liquid through a pipe line to the dispensing cabinets on the island. These dispensing cabinets

contain a check valve and strainer, a manually operated shut-off

valve, a meter, and the Veeder-Root clock which records the quantity

and value of each sale. The dispensing cabinet in all cases has the same outward appearance as a conventional gasoline pump and is operated in exactly the same manner. When the hose nozzle is re- moved from the hanger and the starting lever is operated, it turns on

a switch in the dispensing cabinet which starts the motor on the

remote control pump. The pump then pushes the liquid through the

pipe line, through the meter and visigage, and out through the nozzle

into the customer's tank. Several dispensers may be connected to a remote control pump. Each dispenser is equipped to either start or stop the motor on a remote control pump.

The most important part of a remote control system to a weights

and measures official is the operating accuracy. The most important

factor influencing the accuracy is the elimination of air from the sys- tem, particularly in such cases where the tank runs dry and permits

air to get into the suction line below the check valve. By putting

a check valve directly on the discharge side of the remote control

pump, a solid column of liquid is retained in the discharge line from

that point all the way through the system to the nozzle. As a safety

factor, some manufacturers provide an additional check valve directly

below the meter in the dispensing cabinet. When the tank is run

dry and air is admitted into the suction pipe below the check valve,

it is necessary that this air be eliminated after a supply has been put

into the storage tank and the system put back into operation.

70
The submerged turbine pump and the submersible motor and pumping unit combination, both of which are installed in the bottom of the

storage tank, are equipped with a small copper-tube return line which

dispels any accumulation of air in the system, and the remote control

pump located directly above or near the storage tank is equipped with an air eliminator comparable to the air eliminator in a conventional

gasoline pump. When using such a pump, it usually is customary

to equip the dispensing units with an air eliminator and install a return

line from the air eliminator back to the tank, in order to eliminate

any air in the system and maintain the accuracy required by the

weights and measures codes.

Mr. Baucom: I believe the term "remote gasoline pump" is incorrect and incomplete, since that term does not accurately and

adequately describe these devices. I think these submerged pump

systems are very good. Through proper placement of a number of

pressure valves we are able to prevent the possibility of any air getting into the fuel line. In addition, this system enables a station

operator to place his storage tank at some distance from his retail dispensing devices. This, I believe, will prevent many mistakes,

such as dropping the wrong fuel into a storage tank.

Mr. Boucher: Did I understand you, Mr. Baucom, that a submerged pump made an air eliminator unnecessary ? Mr. Baucom: With this type system there is air elimination, but

the conventional type of air eliminator is not necessary. Mr. W. B. Johnson: I would like to add to Mr. Baucom's com- ments by saying that the submerged-type turbine pump will not

pump air. The impellers do not come in contact with the side walls

of the pump housing; therefore, they cannot pump air. Admittedly,

it is possible to get air into the system, and means have been provided

to eliminate such air before it reaches the meter.

If the tank runs empty, the liquid in the column from the submerged

pump to the tank outlet will drain back into the tank and air then

will enter this portion of the system—up to the check valve. We

have installed a quarter-inch copper tube that runs from the highest

point in the turbine-pump system, just below the check valve, back

into the tank. This tube runs on the outside of the pump-column

housing. When the column is full of air and the tank is loaded full with gasoline, the air is trapped between the top of the gasoline level and the check valve at the top of the column. When the pumping

unit is activated the liquid pushes the air up to the check valve, and

since it cannot be build up enough pressure to open the valve, the air

is pushed out through the copper tube and back into the tank. The

column of liquid will not compress the air to a sufficient pressure to open the check valve, therefore, air cannot get into the system beyond

this check valve.

Mr. Heaslip: Is it not true that the specifications of Handbook 44

call for an air eliminator u

or other effective means?"

Mr. Johnson: That is correct. Many tests have been conducted on these devices by company technicians and by weights and measures

officials. All persons who have participated in these tests have been

completely satisfied that the system described will eliminate air. Mr. Turnbull: Does this system provide a proper interlock for

each individual meter ? Mr. Johnson: The interlock operates in exactly the same manner

as on a conventional pump. The numerals on the register must be

71
returned to zero before the mechanism will allow another transaction

to start. (Additional general comment on the subject was made by Mr. Baucom, Mr.

Boucher, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Schellenberger, Mr. R. E. Meek, Mr. Reese, Mr.

Kirk, and Mr. Fraser.) (The Conference was recessed until 2:00 p. m.)

FIFTH SESSION—AFTERNOON OF THURSDAY, MAY 21, 1953

(R. D. Thompson, Vice President, presiding)

REPORT ON THE PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON

LEGAL METROLOGY

By E. C. Crittenden, Consultant, National Bureau of Standards Last year at the Thirty-Seventh National Conference, Mr. Bussey

arranged for a brief account of pending proposals to establish an international conference which would be in many respects similar to your

National Conference. (See Report of the Thirty-Seventh National

Conference on Weights and Measures, 1952, pages 19-20.) During

the year, definite progress has been made on this subject, and I am

pleased to have this opportunity to tell you about it. While the project is primarily European, we in this country have some interest in it, particularly at this time when our Government is trying to promote economic development in the countries of Western

Europe. Freedom of trade among those countries would help to attain more effective use of their resources, and a reasonable degree of

uniformity in the regulation of weights and measures is one condition

favoring free exchange of goods.

As was reported last year, this project was launched by a formal

diplomatic conference called by the French Government in 1937. It was then agreed that a permanent international organization would be

worth its cost, and that it should be distinct from the existing Inter- national Bureau of Weights and Measures, which deals with basic

standards rather than commercial practices. To mark this dis- tinction the new organization was at first called International

Conference on Practical Metrology; later this was changed to Legal

Metrology;

A Provisional Committee was appointed in 1937 to prepare detailed

plans for the organization, but the war and other calamities pre- vented the completion of this task for 15 years. Finally a meeting of

the reorganized Provisional Committee was held in Brussels, Belgium,

October 2 to 4, 1952. It included members from 15 countries:

Austria, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, France, Germany,

Great Britian, Mexico, Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, Switzerland,

the U. S. S. R., the United States, and Yugoslavia, and from the

International Bureau of Weights and Measures. Representatives

from Argentina, India, and Italy were also appointed, but for various reasons were unable to get to the meeting.

In preparation for the meeting, the officers of the Provisional

Committee had prepared a draft of a treaty to set up the proposed

permanent Conference. As a result of full discussion of this draft at the 3-day meeting, various amendments were adopted, and a revised

draft is now out for final comment by members of the Committee.

The revised statement of reasons for the creation of the new organization (translated) is as follows:

72
The International Conference on Legal Metrology has as its principal

objects:

(1) to form a center of documentation and information; in the

first place, on the different national services concerned with the

control of measuring instruments which are, or may be, subject to

legal regulations; in the second place, on the instruments themselves

from the point of view of conception, construction, and use;

(2) to publish the texts of the legal requirements for measuring

instruments and their use in force in the different countries, with such

comments regarding laws and administration as are necessary for full understanding of the requirements;

(3) to study, with a view to unification of methods and regulations,

those problems of metrology, either legislative or administrative,

which are of interest internationally;

(4) to develop a model law and set of regulations on measuring

instruments and their use;

(5) to develop a typical plan for the organization of a service to control the use of measuring instruments;

(6) to determine the qualities which are necessary and sufficient as a basis for international approval of a type of measuring instrument;

and

(7) to promote relations between the metroiogical services and

laboratories of the countries joining in the Convention.

Questions regarding legislation or administration applying to a

particular country are excluded from the scope of the Conference

unless that country expressly requests that the}' be considered.

The member countries agree to furnish the Conference with such

documentation in their possession as they believe will be useful for the attainment of the purposes set forth above.

The organization proposed to carry on the work thus outlined would

include three levels, being very similar to the General Conference on

Weights and Measures which has under it the International Committee

and International Bureau of Weights and Measures. The top authority would be an International Conference to which any country

desiring to join the organization could send delegates. The Conference would meet at 6-year intervals. Its real working agency

would be an International Committee consisting of 20 members

elected by the Conference. These members would be men actually

serving in the weights and measures services of then respective

countries or having active official relations with such services. They

would serve for a 6-year term, provided that they remained in weights

and measures work. The Committee would meet at least once each

two years, and could appoint subcommittees to cany on specific

projects between sessions.

The third level in the organization would be a permanent Inter- national Bureau or Central Office to provide secretarial service, to

collect and distribute documents and other information and to perform

other necessary services under the direction of the International

Committees.

All of this activity would of course cost some money. Up to the

present time funds for general operating costs have been provided by

the French government. When the organization gets into regular

operation annual costs are estimated at about 100,000 gold francs,

which is equivalent to $32,670. It is proposed that costs be shared

269870—;531 6 73
among member countries on the basis of population. There would

be four groups of member countries to pay shares as follows

:

Group Range of population Shares

l

• 1 2 10 to 40 millions 2

3 40 to 100 millions 4 4 Above 100 millions. __ 8

If the United States joined, it would of course fall into group four. A hypothetical budget has been set up, based on membership by 18

of the countries which have been represented in the preliminary dis- cussions. This budget would call for the payment of about $5,000

per year by the United States. As the next step in this project it is expected that the French

government will submit the proposed treaty to all other national

governments. If then no radical changes in the draft are proposed,

the French government will presumably issue formal invitations to a full-scale diplomatic conference to act on the treaty. The most

likely date for such a conference is now September or October of 1954.

The questions with which the proposed organization is intended

to deal are of considerable potential importance because they would

affect the manufacture and sale of instruments used for weighing

and measuring commodities and also the practices followed in packing

commercial commodities and in specifying quantities. A reasonable

degree of uniformity in the requirements established by various

countries would obviously be advantageous for international trade,

and if the work of the Conference is carried on successfully, it would

eventually have much influence in furthering such uniformity. In

the beginning, however, the plan would be to collect and publish in- formation about the requirements and practices of the different

countries, rather than to attempt to change those in force in any

country.

For the United States it would certainly be difficult to take an

effective part in the detailed technical work of the Conference. The

most obvious source of difficulty is the fact that we have no national

administration of weights and measures. Even in the states, the

weights and measures services often do not cover some measuring

devices which the European services usually do control, such as gas,

electricity, and taxi meters. Another basic difficulty is that nearly

all the prospective member countries use the metric system of units,

and of course any agreement to pack commodities or specify quantities

in simple multiples of those units would be entirely unacceptable in

this country.

On the other hand, it might be worth the cost in time and money to keep in touch with the new organization in order to safeguard American

interests. For example, our participation might prevent the adoption

of regulations too favorable to the use of metric units or imposing

undue costs upon our exporters of agricultural or of manufactured

products. When the proposal is formally presented to our Government, it will be the duty of the Department of State to weigh these

considerations and make a decision, subject to Congressional approval,

as to whether the United States will join in the new undertaking.

74
REMARKS OF WALLACE Rl BRODE, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR,

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

(Dr. Brode outlined the editorial policy of the Bureau as it affects weights and

measures publications. He stated that the printed reports of the National Conference were edited carefully in order that only useful reference material be in- cluded. The National Bureau of Standards Editorial Committee, of which

Dr. Brode is Chairman, screens proposed publications and endeavors to assist in making available those documents that will be truly beneficial. Examples of recent weights and measures publications of the Bureau are Circular 501, Federal and State Weights and Measures Laws, and Circular 540, Weights and Measures

Case Reference Book.)

REMARKS OF MRS. KATHRYN M. SCHWARZ, NATIONAL BUREAU OF

STANDARDS

(Mrs. Schwarz recounted the preparation and contents and described methods

of use of National Bureau of Standards Circular 540, Weights and Measures Case

Reference Book. Mrs. Schwarz stated that a suggested method of using the new

publication, as. well as general information on its composition are to be found in the preface and introduction of the book.)

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON METHODS OF SALE OF

COMMODITIES, PRESENTED BY J. G. ROGERS, CHAIRMAN

Your Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities submits its report to this Conference.

The field of items in our commercial and industrial systems remaining for consideration has narrowed considerably since the inception

of this Committee back in 1940. In the intervening years there has

been such exhaustive treatment given to many essential subjects in our commercial structure, by way of recommendations for proper

methods of sale, that we have come to a point where there is very

little that is new. This report, therefore, mainly contains items that were considered but not given final action at past Conferences, and

others that, by requests made to the Committee, have been reopened

for review. Some in this latter class that were recommended for further consideration had been so definitely concluded at past Conferences that there seemed to be little point in reviving them. They

are not included in what we now offer. There is only one item that is new in the list of those we are pre- senting at this time. It is, however, a highly important one, because

of its nature, developments in distribution and sale, and the place it

is taking commercially by reason of its expanding use in agricultural

pursuits.

Outside of this, your Committee received nothing in the way of

proposals or recommendations on any new subject, either from those

within our Conference group or from those in commercial or industrial

enterprises. We do not, however, attribute this to indifference or lack of interest in the work of this Committee as related to Conference

affairs, but rather to the fact, as indicated in the foregoing, that there

has been a very wide coverage of essential commodities in what already

has been done, through actions of the Conference, to regulate methods

of sale in pursuance of the recommendations we offered as a result of our studies and observations on each specific issue that received our

attention. Of most concern now is whether the various State jurisdictions activate by law or regulation the recommendations when adopted

by the Conference. The promotion of uniformity is highly desirable

in weights and measures affairs, and this is only made possible through

75
coordinated effort to establish uniform requirements in all States. Changes in laws or regulations frequently are necessar}^ in order to carry out what the Conference determines to be the proper methods

or procedures to be used in the barter and sale of commodities.

Quick action is not alwaj^s possible in making such changes nor in

placing something new on the statute books, but no concerted action

by our group should be forgotten. Where legislation to conform is needed, there should be persistent effort to obtain it, in the interest

of improving the general weights and measures structure of operations.

The following items are presented now for the consideration and

appropriate action of this Conference.

1. Anhydrous Amrrwnia and Other Liquid Chemical Fertilizers with Pressure Characteristics—Shall be sold by avoirdupois net weight,

provided, however, that, when maintained in liquid form with temperature corrected to 60° F, it may be also sold by liquid volume, based on the United States standard gallon of 23 1 cubic inches, its multiples

and binary submultiples.

Delivery tickets shall be provided, in duplicate, containing the

date of sale or delivery, the name and address of the seller and the

buyer, the trade name and description of the product, and the net

weight expressed in terms of avoirdupois pounds and/or fractions

thereof, or the liquid volume expressed in terms of the United States

gallon and/or fractions thereof, as determined.

When the product is sold and delivered in containers or in package form, it shall be sold by net weight only, and said container shall be plainly marked in a permanent manner with tare weight, and,

attached to each container, shall be a tag on which the net weight of

the contents is declared.

(As recommended in the Committee Report, this item listed 68° as the refer- ence temperature. This temperature figure was amended from the floor to 60° F

and accepted by Committee Chairman Rogers.) Note: In this, we are 'dealing with a subject that is comparatively new

to the weights and measures field of endeavor. The expanding use, in agri- cultural channels, of liquid chemical fertilizers of the classifications comprehended in this item dictates the need for setting up proper quantity

control at the official regulatory level with all possible dispatch. In this event the situation will not get out of hand, as it did with liquefied petroleum gas, with which these fertilizers have comparable relationship because

of their gaseous pressure characteristics. Our recommendation is confined to the quantitative phase with which it is the main prerogative of this Conference to deal. In the development of legislation to cover fully all essentials entailed, other phases such as quality,

grade, storage, transportation, distribution, equipment, and safety factors, should, and probably will, be given full consideration by the various State

jurisdictions in setting up their laws and regulations to govern these fertilizers. Evidence of the necessity for safety provisions is found in the fact that anhydrous ammonia contains 82 percent nitrogen by weight and is a substance that vaporizes at minus 28° F and exerts a pressure of 114 pounds

per square inch at 70° F and 200 pounds per square inch at 100° F. The

time for regulatory action on these liquid chemical fertilizers is now. This we recommend.

Mr. Woodward: Since the reference temperature of 60° F, vapor

pressure corresponding to 93 pounds per square inch, is standard in the industry, and since all. published tables since the beginning of the

industry in 1928 are corrected to 60° F, I would suggest that the

Committee recommendation be amended to read "with temperature

corrected to 60° F."

76
Mr. Baucom: Although the reference temperature of 68° F was

arrived at in North Carolina after consultation with representatives

from the Grange, the Farm Bureau, the Department of Agriculture,

and the Board of Agriculture, I am willing to recommend that we

amend the Committee report according to Mr. Woodward's suggestion and thus be in line with current industry data.

Mr. J. T. Kennedy: Although I subscribe in general to the

Committee recommendation, I feel that that part which has to do

with the furnishing of delivery tickets is, in general, beyond the scope

of this particular committee.

(After additional general comments by Mr. Woodward, Mr. Rogers, Mr. Baucom, Mr. Morgan, and Mr. Kennedy, the Committee recommendation, as amended, was adopted.)

2. Inert Liquid Fertilizers—-This item was retained by the Committee for further study.

(The Committee Report made the following recommendation: ' 'Shall be sold by volume based on the United States standard gallon of 231 cubic inches, its multiples and binary submultiples, or by avoirdupois net weight.")

(Following the introduction of this item, considerable discussion ensued. Comments by Mr. Woodward, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Brenton, and Committee

Chairman Rogers brought out that the item title was not sufficiently definitive and that temperature should be stipulated when pressure is the determining

factor of a recommendation.)

(Upon a motion from the floor, the Conference voted that this item be retained by the Committee for further study.)

3. Preheated Fuel Oils.—Shall be sold by determined net weight or by volumetric measurement based on the United States standard

gallon of 231 cubic inches, its multiples and binary submultiples, the

said measurement to be corrected to 60° F. When sold on the basis of volumetric measurement, determined

by the certified capacity of a vehicle tank compartment, the vehicle

tank compartment and the piping shall be so designed and constructed and shall be so mounted upon the vehicle that complete

delivery shall be made from any compartment through the delivery

faucets.

(As recommended in the Committee Report, the second paragraph of this item read as follows: "When sold on the basis of volumetric measurement, de- termined by the certified capacity of a vehicle tank compartment, the fuel tank

and the piping shall be so designed and constructed and shall be so mounted upon

the vehicle that complete delivery may be made from any compartment through

the delivery faucets." This wording was amended upon motion from the floor to read as above.) Note: In 1946 the 32d National Conference on Weights and Measures

adopted a recommendation of this Committee which read as follows: Preheated Petroleum Products. Should be sold by determined net weight, and serialized delivery tickets containing proper information

as to quantity, and identification of the seller and buyer should be

issued to the purchaser and a copy retained by the dealer. The Committee further recommends in this connection that in jurisdictions having weighmasters, official certification be required on

the prescribed tickets. The subject of preheated oils thereby was treated in a general way, such treatment including oils of all classifications whether intended for use as

fuels or for other purposes, as, for instance, preheated asphalt oils so ex- tensively employed in road maintenance operations.

Notwithstanding the action already taken, the subject was reopened at the 36th National Conference in 1951 with specific reference to fuel oils, and,

by vote of that body, was referred back to the Committee on Methods of Sale

of Commodities for further study and report. 77
Our further explorations over the past two years have produced little to change our views as first presented. The sole purpose in this, as with other

issues, is to find the safest, simplest, and most determinative way in which

a commodity should be sold. The nature of the oils under consideration is such that, when they are sold by volumetric measurement, inconsistencies in quantity values are quite pronounced because of the variable factors of temperature changes, viscosities, and specific gravities. All of these vari- ables have their effect and must be taken into consideration in arriving at quantitative determinations based on the 60° F. reference temperature

employed by the petroleum industry. The process lacks the simplicity that

is to be found in the weight method of determination, which, in our considered

opinion, best can serve the interests of all concerned. The industry probably will demur at the proposed change in methods,

but is it any more unreasonable to require a dealer in liquid fuel to provide

himself with a scale than it is for a dealer in solid fuel? However, the proposal entailed in our recommendation would not impel this. It would

require representation by weight, and the scale would be the safety factor

for the purveyor. The dealer would be charged with the responsibility of assuring weight accuracy, whether his determinations were made by conversion from volumetric measurement or by actual weighings. The change in methods probably would affect the wholesale level more than it would the

retail level as presently constituted. Many retailers now combine the sales

of liquid fuels and solid fuels in their enterprises. The prevailing competitive fuel situation has compelled this in numerous instances; conse- quently, such dealers are equipped with scales and would be little affected by the change.

There recently have been some experimentations at the wholesale level

of the industry in the metering of preheated oils. This, of course, necessitates the heat-jacketing of meters for workability. A member of this Committee participated on one of these initial operations where comparisons

of volume with weight were made. The results of quantity determinations

by measurement and by weight in this project, while not in agreement, were

not too far apart, and metering would, therefore, appear to have favorable

possibilities. This was a bulk station operation where metering was feasible by reason of the facilities and type of installation provided. The method,

if it finds general adoption within the industry, probably will be confined at present to such locations and installations. Metering of preheated oils from

tank trucks at the retail level is quite another thing, and would appear to present greater problems and difficulties. Safety factors in relation to

auxiliaries for the heating of meters must be considered among other things

which may militate against the use of meters for these oils at this level of the

trade. In consequence of the further consideration that has been given this subject and that nothing has been offered this Committee to discredit the soundness of our recommendation as adopted by a former Conference, we

maintain it in substance and principle and advocate that it stand as a completed action of this body. At the same time, we realize, of course, that

there may be meritorious future developments to justify an altered opinion,

but, until these transpire, we believe that the weight method of sale for pre- heated fuel oil and other oils in this category should be invoked.

(The Committee recommendation, as amended, was adopted.)

4. Peat Moss—Shall be sold on the basis of cubic contents, and

packages shall be marked in terms of cubic feet and/or cubic inches.

There shall be an allowable tolerance in cubic content not to exceed 3 percent of the stated package volume. Packages shall be

marked with the name and address of the producer or packer. Note: This controversial subject is another holdover from the last Conference, when an initial attempt was made to formulate recommendations

that would establish proper regulations as to methods of sale for this commodity.

The original thought of this Committee was that we could treat the subject

of peat moss in a general way and with a single recommendation. In further exploring the subject, it became apparent that this is not feasible, due to the

various classifications of the substances that are marketed under the general term "Peat Moss." In our considered opinion, this is, in many instances, a misnomer by reason of the fact that many of the products represented and

78
sold as such are really not a moss at all, but other types of decomposed or semicarbonized vegetation, such as sphagnum peat, sedge peat, hypnum

peat, leaf mold, and humus top soil. What we have really dealt with in our proposed method of sale is the peat which is a true moss derivative and

which, under its proper definition, is the only one to which the designation

• peat moss" properly applies.

Mr. Swecker: I am appearing here by the direction of the

executive secretary of the American Kose Society, an organization

having its headquarters in Harrisburg, Pa., with 13,000 members

throughout the United States. Members of the American Rose

Society are very much interested in this subject because they use a very large quantity of peat moss in the growing of roses. Xearly

all of these members are amateur rose growers but they use peat moss in large quantities.

In the interest of rendering its members a service, the American

Rose Society would like to urge the National Conference to make a thorough study of the methods in question in order to arrive at a standard method of sale which will assure fairness in measure to the consumer and not unfairly burden the seller. We are not at this time

in a position to recommend a method of sale but we do wish to invite

the attention of the Conference to the great variation in the character

of the several methods. This variation is, in itself, sufficient reason

to preclude the application of any known single method of selling all of these products in like manner to the so-called Michigan peat moss, which is vastly different in character and chemical reaction from each

of several other products known as soil sponge, etc. It is our opinion

that these products are humidified peats, capable of typical reactions

within the soil which are associated commonly with humus particles

when intimateh" co-mixed with the soils. The origins of these products differ, as do the degrees of decay.

Thus are created properties which will not enable all of the products

to be sold in one single method. The American Rose Society, therefore, does recommend that the National Conference on Weights and

Measures first establish definitions and standards of identity for the

various peat products known to commerce and then provide for their

sale by methods appropriate to the specified product. We do suggest

that perhaps the products commonly sold as peat moss, peat humus,

sphagnum peat. German peat, etc., could be identified by the nature

of their origin. For instance, certain of the foregoing are known to be peat derivative products. Others are known to be of sphagnum

origin, and still others are a type of processed peat.

It appears at this time feasible to identify the various peat products.

When such identification is established, it further appears practical

to stipulate methods of sale for the several products. I regret. that I was not informed of the hearing by this committee earlier this week

and did not have an opportunity to appear there and present the

views of the American Rose Society. We feel that the general treat- ment in this way of the general subject of peat moss is not adequate

to deal with the various types of peat moss that are customarily sold. Mr. M. T. Graham: As a matter of record, the Federal Trade

Commission has specified the rules for marking all peat products,

and they must be marked "Peat Moss" or "Peat Moss Sphagnum."

Peat moss is a peat formed in the decay of sphagnum moss, etc. The

market product is peat moss and must be so marked. That is part

of the Federal Trade Commission's directive.

79
As a matter of practice, we are suggesting that these products be

sold on a cubic measure basis. Mr. J. T. Bell: We produce and sell about a million bales of peat moss a year. Peat moss can be compressed anywhere from 2, to 3K, to 1, and, when you release the pressure or when it comes out of the bale, it resumes approximately 70 percent of its original volume.

However, due to the different methods of processing, the amount of resiliency varies. We have decided to sell it by measure. However

if anyone else wants to sell by weight, there is nothing to stop them.

To give fair measure to the customer, they should also indicate the

volume. It is the volume that counts, and not the weight. A bale of dry peat moss weighing 100 pounds could be increased by wetting up

to* 800 or 900 or 1,000 pounds. I suggest very strongly that the

motion be adopted as recommended by the Chairman.

Mr. Swecker: One gentleman spoke of the Federal Trade Commission's requirements that each package of peat moss be labeled as

to origin. Average rose growers who order a bale of peat moss or

a bag of peat moss simply specify a bale or bag of peat moss and pay

no attention to the origin of the product. Nevertheless, the origin

does have a great deal to do with whether you are getting your money's

worth. I notice one thing more about this provision. It states that

peat moss shall be sold on the basis of cubic content; packages shall be marked in terms of cubic feet and/or cubic inches. I don't know

what that means. Does that mean compressed content or loose

content ? How are you going to determine how much loose content

you are going to have ? It would not seem to me to mean a great deal

because you could make your bag or bale of peat moss any size you

want according to how much the product is compressed, how loose

it is, or how much moisture it has, and it would seem to me this method would not give the customer much protection.

Mr. Rogers: Don't you believe that competition will pretty well

take care of that ? The buyer will decide that the next time he buys

he is going to shop around and find a place that will give him a more

compact article. It is difficult to establish this ratio pressure. Mr. Swecker: I am in favor of some kind of control, but I don't

believe this is going to solve the problem at all. Mr. Bell: I would like to say that we have studied this problem

at great length and perhaps if anyone should know whether the

problem can be solved completely we should. We could not find a complete solution to the problem. The only thing we can do is this,

if we have a bale of peat moss which measures 7 cubic feet in the bale

the customer gets 7 cubic feet at least. In our case we feel we give

them more because it usually expands to about 40 cubic feet, but in

an}' case we give the customer what he has bought, namely 7 cubic

feet of peat moss.

(The Committee recommendation was adopted.)

5. Rope {all types and classifications) —Shall be sold by standard

net weight or linear measure. When packaged in any manner, the

package must be marked with the weight or linear measure of the

rope, the weight to be either the net weight or the gross and tare weights.

Note : A slight furor was caused recently by a proposed Federal specification to accept gross weight as the basis of sale for sisal rope. The negative re- action of the weights and measures authorities of the various States seems to have been quite positive in relation to this. 80
The 31st National Conference in 1941 adopted a recommendation of the Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities that twine and cordage should

be sold by standard net weight or linear measure. Rope would seem to fall quite definitely within that category, but, in order to clarify this and to remove all question or doubt, this Committee now recommends the foregoing.

(The Committee recommendation was adopted.)

6. Seeds (agricultural, horticultural, and jioricultural) —Shall be sold

hy avoirdupois net weight, and, when in package form with contents exceeding % avoirdupois ounce, the net quantit}7 shall be declared on

the container. Note: This recommendation generalizes on the seed subject to include

all classifications. The 33rd National Conference of 1947 took action on

garden seeds and grass seeds under these specific designations as presented

in Items 8 and 9 of this Committee's report of that year. . Your Committee now deems it advisable to expand the recommendations as to proper methods

of sale in order to remove all doubt of our intentions and to be consistent in relation to quantity regulation for seeds of all kinds. Representations that reached the Committee from various sources within the seed trade since our original action was taken on this issue influenced our reconsideration and the consequent proposal we now offer. This recommendation is designed principally to eliminate the so-called "gross for net" method of sale for seed which has been a long prevailing

custom, mainly employed at the wholesale level. Under this method,

the retail dealer pays for the bag or other container at the price of the

seed. When there was a parity in values between the container and its weight in seed, "gross for net" was accepted by the retailer with little if any

objection. Conditions have changed. Seed prices have gone soaring.

The value of the seed as compared with the container is now far out of balance, and the retailer strongly demurs because of the appreciable losses he sustains through the method of sale imposed upon him. With exceptions that are repressed by weights and measures supervision as they arise, there

is little difficulty experienced at the retail level, where sale by net weight

is now the prevailing custom. It should prevail in all segments of the

industry. Wholesalers cannot justifiably be excepted, regardless of their handling problems of preparation, storage, and packaging. Their problems

are common to all engaged in enterprises dealing in products of the soil. Equity in seed transactions straight through from the wholesaler to the consumer can only be established and maintained by a uniform method of sale based on a sound and ethical principle of trading, which in this instance

is the net-weight method that we recommend.

There is another phase of the seed situation that may require specific treatment. This relates to the trade in small packages, which this Committee will further explore with the purpose of reaching conclusions as to whether the minimum of }{ ounce, as prescribed under general net-weight

requirements to define what constitutes a package entitled to exemption

from marking, should be reduced, and also whether another method of marking should be invoked for certain seeds that have values greater than

gold.

(The Committee recommendation was adopted.)

7. Pickles and Pickle Products in Package Form—Shall be sold by

drained net weight.

(The Committee Report contained the recommendation "PICKLES (cut, chopped, or viscous) should be marked by volume or drained net weight." This recommendation was amended on motion from the floor.) (Following the presentation of this item, considerable discussion was entered

into by the delegates. Comments and explanations developed the amendment

which was offered by Mr. Blickley. Mr. Rowe stated that the regulations of the Federal Food and Drug Administration provided for sale of pickles by drained

weight as well as by volume, and further that, under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic

Act, all such declarations of content must be accurate and in terms which are understandable to consumers.)

(The Committee recommendation, as amended, was adopted.)

81
8. Ice Cream

Note: It was recommended to this Committee that this subject be re- vived. Our original recommendations for methods of sale of ice cream and

related frozen products are of record as having been adopted by the 32nd

National Conference in 1946. References to this subject are to be found

in Item 2, page 28 of the printed report of the Conference for that year. This Committee has nothing further to add in this connection at this time

other than the observation that progress has been slow in establishing

sale-by-weight for such commodities. Notwithstanding this, there has

been a decided trend in various areas, on the part of dealers at the retail

level, to adopt this method of sale for bulk ice cream. They seem to have

taken the matter into their own hands, even without laws or regulations to compel them. This, however, apparently has had no effect upon the major

ice cream interests, who continue to oppose weight legislation for their products.

Our purpose of including this topic again is, therefore, in deference to the opinion of Conference members that this subject should be kept alive be- cause of its importance as a commercial issue. (The Report of the Committee on Methods of Sale of Commodities, as amended, was adopted by the Conference.)

(The Conference was adjourned, to reconvene on Fridav, May 22, 1953, at 9:30 a. m.)

SIXTH SESSION—MORNING OF FRIDAY, MAY 22, 1953

(F. M. Greene, Vice President, presiding)

REMARKS OF ROBERT WILLIAMS, SEALER OF WEIGHTS AND

MEASURES, NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK

(Mr. Williams explained the operation and described the advertising of certain "frozen food plans." He -stated that price-per-pound advertising of large portions of beef is sometimes misleading because of losses in trimming and preparing

the meat. Mr. Williams explained that a customer might purchase a quarter

of beef weighing a certain number of pounds at a price which seemed to be well below the retail price. Upon receipt of the meat, the customer learned by weighing the packages that the quantity delivered was substantially less than was

represented. This loss was explained by the vendor as being due to trimming

an explanation difficult to refute or to check. Three successful prosecutions of operators of the plans were related by Mr.

Williams, who stated further that a plan of buyer education through public

speaking is effective against dealers who would make false advertising claims.)

PERFORMANCE OF INSPECTORS AND GASOLINE PUMPS

By W. J. Youden and M. W. Jensen, National Bureau of Standards The immediate result of any tests or scientific research is a group

of numbers. The value of the data thus obtained depends upon the

proper interpretation of these numbers. The Statistical Engineering

Section of the National Bureau of Standards is frequently asked to give statistical consideration to data obtained in a very wide variety

of tests and experiments.

At the direction of the 37th National Conference on Weights and

Measures the Specifications and Tolerances Committee designed aud

planned a series of tests ou retail gasoline dispensing devices. The

survey included full-flow tests on drafts of 1, 5, 10, and 15 gallons,

and 5-gallon per minute tests on 1-, 5-, and 10-gallon drafts. Members of the Office of Weights and Measures of the Bureau have interpreted for the Committee the data obtained in the survey. Important

portions you will fiud in the Tentative and Final Reports of the

Committee. This paper discusses some of the difficulties that arise

82
in the interpretation of these data and suggests a method of reaching

a conclusion.

The analysis of any group of measurements consists of searching

for facts in the data. A statistician will make statements which,

though puzzling to the layman, have definite meanings in statistical computations. For example when a man tells you that he has delivered 5 gallons of gasoline into the tank of your automobile, he means

that the quantity is, for all practical purposes, 5 gallons. If he said

that he had delivered 1,155 cubic inches, there is the implication that

the volume is, to the nearest cubic inch, 1,155 cubic inches.

A statistician has at his disposal various formulas and techniques.

He uses these to make certain predictions as to the behavior of

numbers.

Since the 5-gallon draft is the normal test on gasoline pumps, we

have analyzed the results of the 5-gallon full-flow portions of the special tests. Such an analysis is of importance, even though the

tests have taught us that a pump can be within tolerance on the

5-gallon test and still fall outside the limits on a different size delivery.

Our formulas tell us that a normal distribution of measurements

should furnish us with results which are predictable. In the case of a group of 923 measurements with a scattering or spread such as was

obtained on the 5-gallon tests, we can predict and the data confirm,

that, 2 out of 3 of the tests will be within 4 cubic inches, 19 out of 20 of the tests will be within 8 cubic inches, and 99 out of 100 of the

tests will be within 10 cubic inches.

These predictions are based upon a computed "standard devia- . tion"—a term familiar to some of you and a term that others of you

might want to learn about.

These statements give a picture of the kind of scatter commonly

exhibited by physical measurements. The term "scatter" will be

used a number of times in this discussion, and in order that we may

have a common understanding of it, suppose you consider what

happens when a large number of pennies are tossed at a line. Of

course, most of the coins will come to rest near the line, but some will bounce or roll and stop some distance on either side of the line. Obviously, the greater the distance from the target line, the fewer

pennies we would find. This is an example of "scatter" as we use the term. Table 1 shows a tabulation of the results of the 923 5-gallon tests obtained during the special survey. By simple computation we

learn that the average error for all of the 923 pumps, on a 5-galloi

test at full flow, is — 1.4 cubic inches. This average error is computed

by adding up all of the gage readings, taking due notice of the signs,

and dividing that total by the number of pumps.

When we apply the standard statistical formula to this data we

learn that these measurements do behave as we have predicted, so we are justified in considering them in search of further information.

The principal purpose of the special tests was to learn the per- formance characteristics of these devices, with regard to legal toler- ances. Another look at our table 1 and we find that all but 62 pumps

performed within the current tolerance of ±7 cubic inches on 5 gallons. It appears obvious that, if a smaller tolerance on a 5-gallon

test is to be imposed, more of these pumps would be rejected. Only

83
a reduction in the scatter of the measurements can prevent an increase

in device rejection.

We have determined that the grand average of our 5-gallon tests was —1.4 cubic inches. This indicates that the pumps must have

been adjusted to a slight minus delivery, and it could be advanced

that a change in tolerance would lead to the disappearance of this minus tendency.

For the purpose of our study we can remove the minus tendency

merely by adding 2 to each of the cubic-inch figures. This has the

effect of shifting the data along the scale without disturbing the scatter. After adding the 2 cubic inches to each figure, —7 becomes —5, and so on until +3 becomes +5. Considering a limit of ±5 cubic inches, we add the pumps beyond our adjusted ±5 and find that we have 103

devices with errors greater than ± 5 cubic inches—rather more than 1 pump in 7, or more precisely 15.4 percent.

This would be a high rate of rejection, and the problem that confronts us is the possibility of reducing this percentage. Various

opinions may exist as to the solution of the problem. The data in table 1 will not, by themselves, supply the answer. Suppose we consider for a moment a large number of pumps, all adjusted as carefully as possible to zero error. Once these pumps are sealed certainly no one will maintain that all the pumps are exactly

right. Indeed, if the manufacturers, or service personnel, possessed

any special device for measuring a 5-gallon delivery without error, this

device would be adopted by weights and measures personnel. As a matter of fact, the service men copy the equipment and methods of the

inspectors. If the pumps could be set precisely at zero and if the

inspection tests w

r ere without error, then we might expect that the

vast majority of the pumps, now spread over 14 cubic inches in table 1, would be bunched in around zero and ±1 cubic inch. How does

the observed scatter come about? Howt much of it is attributable to the setting, and how much to the testing of the pump?

Table 1. Tabulated results of 5-gallon, full-flow portion of special tests on retail gasoline pumps

Cubic Number of Cubic Number of inches devices inches devices

110 + 1 49 -1 78 + 2 74 -2 133 + 3 13 -3 76 + 4 36 -4 116 + 5 20 -5 49 + 6 20 -6 69 + 7 4 -7 14 + 8 6 -8 18 + 9 4 -9 7 + 10 6 -10 8 + 11 -11 3 + 12 2 -12 1 + 13 -13 + 14 1 -14 + 15 1 -15 1 + 16 1 -16 1 + 17 2

84
It would seem plausible enough to expect that the larger share of the responsibility rests upon the servicemen in their adjustments

than on the natural wear of the device. If the adjustment error can

be reduced, the scatter of the data should be likewise reduced; but it must be admitted that pumps cannot be set more accurately than they

are tested. If this were possible, surely the inspectors would adopt

the methods of the servicemen.

We are led to a simple method of attacking the problem. If we

can determine the scatter that arises in testing, we know that at

least an equal amount must be present in the setting, or adjusting, of

the pumps. What is observed in table 1 is the combined scatter from

both adjusting and testing. If we can separate the scatter arising

in testing the pumps, we may attribute an equivalent additional

scatter to the servicing.

Most people probably have some opinion of the accuracy of the

inspection tests. The measurements can be recorded to the nearest

cubic inch, and inspectors have no trouble in repeating a 5-gallon

test and getting results that differ by no more than 1 cubic inch.

However, this by no means reveals the real errors due to inspection.

It is easy to get two readings from the same pump to agree closely

when they are taken in immediate succession. Here we have the same

operator, the same temperature, and the same test measure. What

we need is the error between tests when a pump is visited and tested

independently by different inspectors, at different times, with each

inspector using his own field measure. That is exactly what happens

when an inspector checks a pump, set earlier by another man with

different equipment. It is unreasonable on the face of it to expect

the service adjustment to agree more closely with the inspector's

test than inspectors can agree among themselves.

To obtain an idea of how much of the errors are chargeable to in- spection, a small project was undertaken by the National Bureau of Standards, in cooperation with the Department of Weights, Measures,

and Markets, of the District of Columbia. Four teams of two men

each were formed, each team having a Bureau man and a District

of Columbia man. These four teams tested six different gasoline

pumps, using standard procedure for o-gallon tests at full flow. Each

of the two men on a team conducted a 5-gallon, full-flow test independently and each read his gage independently; however, the two

men on a team used the same field standard. The 48 tests were re- peated by the same teams, on the same six pumps, 3 days later. The

entries in table 2 show, for each of the 96 readings, the number of cubic inches over or under zero error on the individual 5-gallon tests. There are 16 readings for each of the 6 pumps. The bottom row

of the table shows that the readings for four of the pumps were

spread, from lowest to highest, over 4 cubic inches; the readings for the other two pumps differed as much as 3 cubic inches. The setting

of the adjustments of the pumps cannot be held in any way responsible

for this scatter in the readings, because all 16 readings were taker on the same pump and over so short a time that no sizable mechanical

|J change in the device should be expected.

What should not be forgotten is that there must inevitably exist a variation in the actual setting of a pump of at least the magnitude

shown by this scatter among the readings for any one pump. Put

another way, an attempt is made to set pumps to deliver the correct

values. There will be some differences in the values actually set. 85
Table 2. Gage readings, in cubic inches, on 5-gallon, full-flow drafts—special

NBS-D.C. gas-pump project

[6 devices, 8 inspectors, 2 days]

Tuesday p. m.

Gasoline pumps

1 2 3 4 5 6 Inspector A. . _ _ -1 +2 B -3 - o -1 +1 C +2 +2 +2 +2 D -1 +2 +2 -1 +2 E +1 +2 +1 +2 +3 +1

< F -1 +1 -1 +2 +2 G — 1 —2 —1 +1 +1 H -3 +1 -2 +1 -1

Friday a. m.

Inspector A . _ -2 +1 -1 +1 -1 B -3

C._ _ . -1 +4 +1 +2

D... +1 +3 +1 +2 +1 E +3 -1 +2 +2

F +3 +2 +2

G -1 +1 -1 +1 +1 H -1 +2 +1 +1 -2

Spread of readings 4 4 3 3 4 4 An inspector tests a pump which is, in fact, off by some amount;

and therefore the result of a test on the device includes not only the

error in setting or adjusting but an additional error of the inspector

who conducted the test. It is easy to identify in these data some of the principal sources of

error: Each man drew a total of 60 gallons from the same 6 pumps.

The averages for the men per 5-gallon delivery are as follows:

Team Field standard

Error for test—

•

1 2

12

34

A

B

C

D

-0. 08 + 1. 17 + 1. 33 -0. 08-0. 50 + 1. 00 + 0. 83 -0. 25

It is clearly the case that men on the same team agreed very well

and that there are larger differences between men on different teams.

The two men on a team used the same field measure and ran their

tests at nearly the same time; thus the difference between teams is explained as the slight differences among the gage settings on the

standards, combined with the slight changes in the pumps, hose ex- pansion and the like. There is very little difference between the days.

The 48 readings made on Tuesday afternoon showed an average per

five gallons of cubic inch, as against the Friday morning readings,

which indicated an average of cubic inch. Time did not permit

a schedule that would include a pronounced shift in temperature.

86
From one point of view the table appears to indicate that these

devices can be operated and tested within very small limits. Here

are 96 readings, and only one as large as +4 cubic inches. All readings are within ±5 cubic inches. It happens, however, that all 6 pumps were very close to being correct. How do we know this?

There are 16 readings on each pump, and the pump average taken for the 8 men, 4 standards, and 2 days, in large part, has lost much of the

scatter due to testing, because these 16 measurements tend to compensate one another. The averages per five gallons for the 6 pumps,

for 80 gallons drawn, are —1.0, +1.7, —0.4, +0.8, +1.0, and +0.5.

Notice that the first pump, with its adjustment off, in fact, by only one cubic inch was charged as being off by 3 cubic inches in 3 of the

16 tests on it. No one would be satisfied to assess the contribution of test measures, temperature/operators or devices, on the basis of just four test measures, two different times and eight men used in this study. A few

repetitions of this or a similar program in different parts of the country

would supplement the extensive data on pumps obtained in the special

survey and in this small project, and thus permit us to estimate just

how accurately we can expect gasoline pumps to be adjusted and

tested. In the absence of adequate information many will rely on personal

experience and observation. Disagreements will arise because men

have different experiences and place their own interpretations upon

their experiences.

One way to handle any question without involving personalities is to put the question to someone not connected with the issue. This

sounds fine until it is pointed out that a person with no acquaintance

with the problem probably is unqualified to answer the question. If he is qualified, he probably has some personal interest in the question.

There is a way out of this dilemma. The question may be framed in abstract terms and then put to the disinterested party.

Suppose we could obtain a firm estimate of the accuracy of testing.

It would suffice to know, for example, the average difference between

the readings on the same pump when visited at different times by

two inspectors each using his own test measure. This information

could be obtained by arranging for each of 100 pumps to be visited

separately by 100 pairs of inspectors.

We don't know what this average would be, so let's call it X cubic

inches. We know that the average error in setting a pump must be at

least as large as the average error in testing.

Now for the question; and you can put it to any qualified statis- tician in the country and get the same answer every time. The question is: Suppose this average difference between readings is 1, 2, or 3 cubic inches, for each of these values, what percent of the devices

would yield readings (obtained by the inspectors) that fall outside the

tolerances of five cubic inches, seven cubic inches, or any other value ? The answers to this question are tabulated below in table 3. Once

you know the testing error you will be able to select the proper line in the table and come to a decision regarding the choice of tolerance

limits. The table shows that when the average difference is small nearly

all the readings stay within tHe listed tolerances. As the testing

error increases, more and more of the devices will appear to be outside the tolerance. Remember that these percentages outside the

87
Table 3. Entries show the percentage of devices that will fall outside various

tolerances, depending upon the accuracy of testing

Average difference in cubic inches between readings of two inspectors

Percentage of devices that will fall outside the limits of ±2^ ±33^ ±5 ±7

1 cubic inch_ . . . 4.6 0.5 0.0 0.0

2 cubic inch .... .... 31.6 16.3 4.6 . 5 3 cubic inch .... . . 50.6 35.2 18.4 6.2

limits do not include devices that fall outside because of wear, gross blunders in setting or testing, or through tampering by the owner.

It is up to you to decide how often it is reasonable and proper to require the reservicing and retesting of pumps in which none of the

last-mentioned causes are operative.

Mr. Ainsworth : Dr. Youden, on the basis of table 2 data, could

you estimate an average between inspectors ? Dr. Youden: This is the sort of question that is proper to address to a statistician. Before I answer, may I state that the

average difference between two inspectors will be one thing, whereas

the average difference between the lowest and highest of a number of inspectors will be greater. Any estimate that I make at this time

would be approximate. There might be two cubic inches, more or

less, between two inspectors. More evidence would be necessary

before I could make a definite prediction. I am quite confident that

the result would fall within the limits of table 2. Mr. Ainsworth: Would you be willing to limit the number to 1 to 3 cubic inches ? Dr. Youden: That would be my estimate.

Mr. Ainsworth: On the basis of the data that you examined,

how much variation between readings on a single meter could you

expect from one inspector ? Dr. Youden: I believe that successive readings made by one

individual using one test measure on one meter would repeat within one cubic inch. Available data has supported that. Mr. Ainsworth: Have we any data which would inform us as to the variation in successive tests on a single meter—variations chargeable to the meter itself ? Dr. Youden : This is something which probably could be answered

out of the experience of people who work with these devices. I would expect some variance in the device itself. Among other things

which might affect the accuracy of the device are temperature effects on the liquids and hose expansion as related to pressure and rates of flow. There is a position in this particular device where current

inherent limitations will impose a barrier to legal performance requirements. There is not much point in requiring a device to test more

accurately than it can maintain itself over a period of time.

Mr. Baucom: Am I right in assuming that this study is based on human error? Dr. Youden: Human error from two sources are an element to be studied in the establishment of legal tolerances. One person must

set the device; he will not set it exactly correct. An inspector then

tests the device; he also will err to a certain extent. The combination

of these two errors will push a certain percent of the devices beyond

the tolerance limits if those limits are too tight.

88
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SPECIFICATIONS AND TOLERANCES,

PRESENTED BY J. P. McBRIDE, CHAIRMAN

Your Committee has held no general meetings during the year. There have been several occasions upon which two or more members

of the Committee found it possible to get together for the purpose of discussing Committee problems. A meeting, held in Boston on

October 23, 1952, was attended by Messrs. John P. McBride, Rollin

E. Meek, and W. S. Bussey, and by representatives of the American

Petroleum Institute and the Gasoline Pump and Meter Manufacturers

Associations. The principal purpose of this meeting was to discuss

problems relative to liquefied petroleum gas. Some of the details

concerning the special gasoline pump survey also were discussed.

Your Committee has continued to function through correspondence,

not only among its members, but with representatives of affected

industries, and with Conference members. This correspondence has

covered various matters pertaining to specifications, tolerances, and

regulations for commercial weighing and measuring devices. This

Report, therefore, represents Committee conclusions in relation to matters referred to it by the 37th National Conference on Weights

and Measures, and to those being brought to the attention of the

Commit tee from other sources. LIQUEFIED PETROLEUM GAS

Among the several items which have been referred to the Committee is the matter of appropriate specifications and tolerances for

liquid-measuring devices used in the commercial quantit3r determination of liquefied petroleum gas. This has been a most difficult problem, and it is with exceeding regret that your Committee reports no

substantial progress. It had been hoped that, as a result of the special

meeting held in Boston, definite progress would be made.

The need for additional research and development in this field was

pointed out by members of your Committee to industry representatives during the Boston meeting. The Committee feels that the

need is to develop not only more accurate, but more simple and

practical means for testing LPG measuring devices. To date, it has

not been possible to get any such program of research and development

under way.

Your Committee feels that it is the joint responsibility of industry

and weights and measures administrators to develop the proper

equipment and methods for testing commercial weighing and measuring devices. With this principle in mind, your Committee recom- mends that the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures

go on record as requesting that the meter manufacturing and petroleum

industries, the National Bureau of Standards, and the various State

and local departments of weights and measures cooperate in providing

the necessary research and development in this field, in order that

practical and accurate equipment and methods for testing these

important devices might be developed. Until this is done, it is most

difficult, if not impossible, for your Committee to prepare the neces- sary and proper amendments to the H44 code for liquid-measuring

devices.

WHEEL-LOAD SCALES AND AXLE-LOAD SCALES

Your Committee has received several inquiries pertaining to the

proper tolerances to be applied to wheel-load and axle-load scales 269870—53 7 89

%
used in connection with the enforcement of highway load-limit laws.

It was pointed out that currently the H44 scale code is not thoroughly

clear on this point and that there was a possibility of several different

interpretations. It might be interpreted that paragraph T.2.3.1. and

table 9 would be applicable, or it might be interpreted that paragraph

T.2.3.2. would be applicable, and possibly some people might contend

that paragraph T.2.3.3. should apply. Insofar as your Committee

knows, all weights and measures officials have been applying Paragraph T.2.3.2. Your Committee is in agreement with this interpretation, and, in order to make the code unquestionably clear and to avoid any possible misinterpretation, we offer the following recom- mendations to this Conference:

SCALE CODE

Amend paragraph D.l.ll. to read as follows:

D.l.ll. Wheel-Load Weighers and Scales; Axle-Load Scales.—Devices

intended solely for official use in the enforcement of traffic and highway laws. D. 1.11.1. Wheel-Load Weigher.—A compact, portable scale specially

adapted to determining the wheel loads of vehicles on highways. D. 1.1 1.2. Wheel-Load Scale.—A scale, installed in a fixed location, having

a load-receiving element specially adapted to determining the wheel loads of highway vehicles. D.l.ll. 3. Axle-Load Scale.—A scale, installed in a fixed location, having

a load-receiving element specially adapted to determining the combined load of

all wheels on any single axle of a highway vehicle. Amend paragraph T.2.3.1. to read as follows:

T.2.3.1. For Large-Capacity Scales Except Livestock, Coal-Mine,

Vehicle, Wheel-Load, Axle-Load, and Freight Scales, Wheel-Load Weighers, and Railway Track Scales.—Basic maintenance tolerances for largecapacity scales except livestock, coal-mine, vehicle, wheel-load, axle-load, and

freight scales, wheel-load weighers, and railway track scales, on under-registration

or on over-registration, shall be as shown in table 9; basic acceptance tolerances

shall be one-half the basic maintenance tolerances. Amend the caption of table 9 to read as follows

:

Table 9.—Maintenance Tolerances for Large-Capacity Scales, Except Livestock,

Coal-Mine, Vehicle, Wheel-Load, Axle-Load, and Freight Scales, Wheel-Load

Weighers, and Railway Track Scales Amend paragraph T.2.3.2. to read as follows:

T.2.3.2. For Livestock, Coal-Mine, Vehicle, Wheel-Load, Axle-Load,

and Freight Scales.—Basic maintenance tolerances for livestock, coal-mine,

vehicle, wheel-load, and axle-load scales, and for scales used exclusively in deter- mining charges for freight transportation, on under-registration or on overregistration, shall be V/% pounds per 1,000 pounds of test load on ratio tests and

2 pounds per 1,000 pounds of test load on weighbeam, reading-face, and unit- weight indications; basic acceptance tolerances shall be one-half the basic maintenance tolerances. (The recommendation of the Committee was adopted.)

FARM MILK TANKS

The 37th National Conference on Weights and Measures directed , the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances to prepare a tentative ' code on farm milk tanks. In drafting this code, the Committee has

kept in mind certain basic principles. First, this is a weights and ! measures code, not a sanitary code. Those agencies and persons who

are interested in the sanitary phase of this equipment have been

consulted, and effort has been made to avoid anything which would

conflict with current or contemplated sanitary requirements.

90
It must be understood that this code will become a part of National

Bureau of Standards Handbook 44. The provisions of the general

code in that handbook are applicable to farm milk tanks just as they

are to other specific codes in the handbook.

For the consideration and action of this Conference, we present

the following tentative code for farm milk tanks

:

TENTATIVE CODE FOR FARM MILK TANKS

A. APPLICATION

A. 1. This code applies to farm milk tanks, as defined, only when these

are used, or are to be used, under an express contract between the producer and

the purchaser and on the premises of the producer, for the commercial measure- ment of milk or other fluid dairy product. If such measurement is accomplished by means of a fluid meter, this code does not apply; in such case the meter shall be subject to the applicable provisions of the code for liquid-measuring

devices. D. DEFINITIONS

D. 1. Farm Milk Tank.—A unit for measuring milk or other fluid dairy

product, comprising a combination of (1) a stationary tank, whether or not equipped with means for cooling its contents, (2) means for reading the level of liquid in the tank, such as a removable gage rod or a gage tube, and (3) a chart

for converting level-of-liquid readings to gallons, or such a unit in which readings

are made on gage rod or gage tube directly in terms of gallons. Each compart- ment of a subdivided tank shall, for purposes of this code, be construed to be a "farm milk tank." (These units are variously known commercially as "farm

bulk milk tanks," "farm cooling tanks," "farm holding tanks," and "producers

tanks.")

S. SPECIFICATIONS

S. 1. Design. (See also S. 2.4.)

S. 1.1. Level.—A farm milk tank shall be in normal operating position when

it is in level. The tank shall be equipped with suitable special means by which

this level can be determined and established, such as a permanently attached two-way or circular level, a plumb bob, leveling lugs, or the like; or the top edge

or edges of the tank shall be so constructed throughout as to provide an accurate

reference for level determinations.

S. 1.2. Discharge Valve.—A farm milk tank shall be equipped with a dis- charge valve through which the tank may be completely emptied when the tank

is in level.

S. 1.3. Gage-Rod Bracket.—If a farm milk tank is designed for use with a

gage rod, a substantial metal gage-rod bracket shall be rigidly and permanently

attached to the tank. The bracket and rod shall be so designed that, whenever

the rod is placed in engagement with the bracket and released, the rod will automatically seat itself at a fixed height and will hang in a vertical position with a

clearance of not less than 3 inches between the graduated side of the rod and the tank wall which it faces.

S. 2. Indicating Means.

S. 2.1. Gage Rod.—A gage rod shall be of metal and shall be of suitable and

rigid design. When seated on its bracket, the rod shall not touch the bottom of the milk tank. The rod shall be graduated throughout an interval corresponding

to at least the upper one-half of the tank capacity.

S. 2.2. Gage Tube.—If a farm milk tank is designed for use with a trans- parent gage tube, such tube shall have an inside diameter of not less than }i inch and shall be open at its top end. At the inlet end of the tube there shall be a

shut-off valve. Immediately adjacent to the tube there shall be permanently mounted a graduated metal scale extending throughout an interval corresponding

to at least the upper one-half of the tank capacity. The graduated scale shall be

so designed and mounted as to reduce parallax to a minimum.

S. 2.3. Spacing and Width of Graduations.—On a gage rod or gage-tube

scale, the spacing of the graduations, center to center, shall be not more than

0.0625 (He) inch and not less than 0.03125 (% 2) inch, and the graduations shall be not less than 0.005 inch in width. (See also G-S. 4.2.3. and G-S. 4.3.)

S. 2.4. Values of Graduations.—On a gage rod or gage-tube scale, the graduations may be designated in inches and fractions thereof. In this case there shall be provided for each such rod or scale and each of the farm milk tanks 91
with which it is associated, a gallonage chart showing values in terms of gallons

corresponding to each graduation on the rod or scale. If a rod or scale is associ- ated with but one farm milk tank, in lieu of linear graduations, values in terms of gallons may be shown directly on rod or scale. Graduation designations shall increase from the bottom upward. The value of a graduated interval (ex- clusive of the interval from the bottom of the tank to the lowest graduation)

shall not exceed 1 gallon for a tank of a capacity of 500 gallons or less, and shall not exceed 2 gallons for a tank of a capacity of more than 500 gallons.

S. 3. Gallonage Chart.—A gallonage chart shall show values at least to the nearest % gallon for a farm milk tank of a capacity of 500 gallons or less, and at least to the nearest 1 gallon for a tank of a capacity of more than 500

gallons. All letters and figures on a chart shall be distinct and easily readable, the chart shall be substantially constructed, and the face of the chart shall be so protected that its lettering and figures will not tend easily to become obliterated

or illegible. S. 4. Installation.—A farm milk tank shall be -rigidly installed in level without the use of removable blocks or shims under the legs. If the tank is not mounted permanently in position, the correct position on the floor for each

leg shall be clearly and permanently defined.

S. 5. Identification.—A farm milk tank and any gage rod and gallonage

chart associated therewith shall be mutually identified, as by a common serial number, in a prominent and permanent manner.

N. NOTES

N. 1. Calibration.—Farm milk tanks shall be originally gaged and officially tested "to deliver." N. 2. Testing Medium.—Water shall be used as the testing medium in gaging

and testing farm milk tanks. N. 3. Gage-Tube Readings.—All gage-tube readings on a farm milk tank,

whether during gaging, testing, or commercial use, shall be made to the top of the meniscus of the liquid in the tube. N. 4. Approval Seals.—When a farm milk-tank installation is officially tested and approved, the gage rod and the gallonage chart, if these elements are

utilized, as well as the tank itself, shall be suitably marked to indicate such

approval.

T. TOLERANCES

T. 1. Minimum Tolerance Values.—On a particular farm milk tank, the maintenance and acceptance tolerances applied shall be not smaller than one-half the value of the minimum graduated interval on the gage rod Or gage-tube scale. T. 2. Basic Tolerance Values.—Basic maintenance and acceptance tol- erances on under-registration and on over-registration shall be as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Maintenance and Acceptance Tolerances for Farm Milk Tanks

Indicated gallonage Tolerance

500 or less __ Gallons%

12

2/2

501 to 1,000, incl 1,001 to 1,500, incl 1,501 to 2,000, incl Over 2,000

R. REGULATIONS

R, 1. Level Condition.—A farm milk tank shall be maintained in level. (An amendment was offered from the floor to change S. 2.3. Spacing and . Width of Graduations, to read "On a gage rod or gage-tube scale, the spacing j of the graduations, center to center, shall be 0.03125 (H2) inch." This amendj ment was defeated and the recommendation of the Committee was adopted.) 1

92
• RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SOUTHERN WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

ASSOCIATION

Your Committee received from the Southern Weights and Measures

Association three recommendations as follows

:

L We recommend that paragraph N. 1.2. on page 66 of Handbook 44, Testing Drafts for Wholesale Liquid-Measuring Devices, be amended by changing the word "should" to "shall" in the last sentence on page 66.

2. We recommend that paragraph S. 10.3. on Vehicle Tank Calibrations be amended to allow the use of more than one indicator.

3. We recommend that the tolerances on Wholesale Liquid-Measuring Devices

be re-examined with the viewpoint of reducing the tolerance, both maintenance

and acceptance, on metering systems delivering 100 gallons or more a minute.

In regard to the first recommendation, your Committee had this matter for consideration prior to the 37th National Conference. The

Committee went so far as to include this same recommendation in the

Tentative Report. However, after looking further into the matter

and determining the availability of proper testing equipment in the

various jurisdictions, this recommendation was deleted from the

Committee's Final Report. Your Committee has made a nationwide

survey on this point during the current year. Questionnaires were

! mailed to all State offices and to the larger city and county offices. Replies were received from 36 States, the District of Columbia, and

Honolulu. Replies were received also from approximately 60 city

and county departments. Nine States and the District of Columbia

reported that they did possess adequate equipment for testing all wholesale liquid-measuring devices in their respective jurisdictions

for one minute at full flow. Seven cities and counties reported that

they have the necessary equipment for this purpose. This means

simply that only nine States and the District of Columbia, plus seven

cities and counties, in the entire United States, would be qualified to

test legally all of these devices in their jurisdictions, were this recom- mendation adopted universally. It is the feeling of your Committee

that, in those jurisdictions which do have the equipment to test all meters in accordance with this recommendation, it makes no difference

whether or not the change is adopted. If a jurisdiction does have

proper equipment, they will use it, whether or not this word is changed

from "should" to "shall." On the other hand, those jurisdictions

which do not possess this type of equipment could not conduct legal

tests on devices which their respective laws direct that they shall test at least once each year. Your Committee is sympathetic to the

thinking that prompted this recommendation; however, it is felt that

present equipment does not justify the amendment. Therefore, the

Committee recommends no action in this regard.

The second item recommended by the Southern Weights and

Measures Association, pertaining to more than one indicator in a vehicle-tank compartment, has been submitted to the Conference

previously and rejected. When the matter of recognizing vehicle-tank

compartments as commercial measures of capacity was first suggested

| to the Conference, back about 1916, the Conference was hesitant.

Many hazards are prevalent in connection with the use of these devices

as measures. After much discussion and several years of investigation

and consideration by the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances, a vehicle-tank code was adopted by the Conference. For the

29th National Conference in 1939, a proposal to allow more than one

93
indicator was prepared by the Committee. This was promptly

rejected by the Conference.

There are a number of sound and logical reasons for limiting vehicletank compartments to one capacity only. At best, a vehicle-tank

compartment is a crude measuring device. A vehicle tank is portable,

and obviously it will not remain always in the same position of level. The springs on the truck or trailer involved, and various conditions

of loading, also contribute to varying the conditions of level. The

sensitivity and readability of these devices are not ideal. Vehicletank indicators necessarily must be placed inside the fill opening, and

well below the top thereof. The greater the distance from the top

of the fill opening to the indicator, the more difficult it is to read the

liquid level, and the less sensitive the device. When multiple indicators are used, it is difficult, if not impossible, to comply with the

sensitivity requirements in Paragraph S.10.4. of the vehicle-tank

code. Also, there is alwa}Ts an opportunity for confusion and possible

fraud when multiple indicators are used in these compartments. Your

Committee does not feel that it is good weights and measures practice to allow the use of more than one indicator in a vehicle-tank

compartment.

It has been pointed out that the use of multiple indicators in vehicletank compartments makes it possible for tank operators to comply

with State highway load-limit laws. Your Committee feels that there

are sufficient means available to tank operators to achieve this neces- sary goal under present regulations. This can be done in any of several ways. The tank can be so constructed that it can be operated

with a certain compartment or compartments empt}r when the heavier

liquids are being transported. Another very good way to cope with

this situation is to employ meters to determine the quantity, and,

therefore, not depend upon compartment calibration.

Your Committee is cognizant of the fact that several jurisdictions

allow multiple indicators in vehicle-tank compartments. It is unfortunate that this could not have been avoided. Your Committee

recommends that this Conference go on record as requesting the

American Petroleum Institute to discourage, through its various

members, the use of more than one indicator in a vehicle-tank compartment, and to urge that the present code be adhered to. The

Committee has heard of instances where as man}' as four indicators

have been allowed. Suggestions have been made for as many as eight

indicators in a single compartment. Your Committee does not feel this is proper.

The Committee recommends no action on the recommendation.

The third recommendation of the Southern Weights and Measures

Association, relative to a possible reduction in tolerances for wholesale

liquid-measuring devices, has been given very careful and serious consideration. The Committee feels that it is inappropriate to recom- mend to this Conference a further reduction in the tolerances for wholesale liquid-measuring devices. As you are aware, the tolerances

for these devices were reduced approximately 50 percent by the 34th

National Conference in 1949. These reduced tolerances were a part

of the codes as published in XBS Handbook 44. Furthermore, the

survey which the Committee made relative to the proposed amendment in Paragraph N.1.2. proves conclusively that only a small per- centage of the jurisdictions are equipped properly and adequately to do a thorough and complete job of testing wholesale liquid-measuring

94
devices. This is an additional reason why further reductions should

not be recommended at this time.

Your Committee believes that there is a widespread lack of understanding of the purposes and uses of established tolerances for weighing and measuring devices. We all agree that tolerances are essential.

It is impossible to attain perfection; however, the establishment of tolerances does not attest that all commercial equipment in a jurisdiction will be in error to the extent of the maximum tolerances provided.

These tolerances merely establish the line of demarcation between

•"legal" and "illegal" equipment. If a device performs within the

established tolerances, then its continued use is "legal." If it is in error in excess of these tolerances, it becomes an "illegal" device,

and its continued use is prohibited by law. It should be the aim of every weights and measures official, device owner or operator, and

maintenance mechanic to see that commercial weighing and measuring devices are maintained at as near zero error as is practicable,

regardless of what the established tolerances may be. When re- pairs and adjustments are found necessary, it should be the constant

aim to adjust each device to as near zero error as is practicable. Your

Committee feels that, if all jurisdictions will thoroughly test wholesale

liquid-measuring devices in accordance with the test procedures outlined in National Bureau of Standards Handbook 45, and apply the

tolerances which are now provided in Handbook 44, this situation

will be well under control and no further tolerance reductions would

be necessary at this time.

GASOLINE PUMP TOLERANCES

The Southern Weights and Measures Association made a recom- mendation to your Committee prior to the 37th National Conference

relative to an amendment to that portion of Table 1, Tolerances for Liquid-Measuring Devices, applying to retail devices. This recom- mendation was carried over for further study after extensive hearings

immediately prior to the 37th National Conference.

During the months immediately following our last Conference,

discussions were held with representatives of both the gasoline pump

and petroleum industries. Special tests were designed and special

report forms drawn. The cooperation of selected weights and measures officials from geographically representative areas of the country was solicited and received. Both the tests and the areas for testing were approved by both industries. It was agreed that designated

representatives of the American Petroleum Institute and the Gasoline

Pump Manufacturers Association would be present to participate in

and observe all tests. The tests required drawing a minimum of 95 gallons from each

device, and were so designed that each draft at each rate of flow was

repeated at least once, and that the results from these repeat drafts were required to verify the original results within stipulated and

strict deviations.

The tests included both full-flow and five-gallon-per-minute drafts

at 1, 5, and 10 gallons, and full-flow drafts at 15 gallons. All field standards employed were carefully calibrated immediately prior to the special tests. Just over 1,000 gasoline pumps, of all makes, and of representative

ages and conditions, and dispensing various brands and grades of products, were tested in locations representative of the temperature

95
and other climatic variations of the United States. The Committee

is indebted to the man}^ weights and measures officials, representatives

of the industries, and gasoline service station operators who cooperated

in this comprehensive survey.

The results of the tests were compiled, tabulated, and pictured

graphically in the Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards. Some of the most significant information is given below.

Since a very large majority of the testing of retail gasoline pumps

is done at the 5-gallon draft, a detailed analysis was made of the

5-gallon tests. Considering only the 5-gallon tests both at full flow

and at 5 gallons per minute, the following results were noted:

93.3 percent of the pumps tested were within the current maintenance tolerance at 5 gallons, full flow. 92.7 percent were within the current maintenance tolerance

at 5 gallons, 5 gpm.

81.7 percent were within the proposed maintenance tolerance

at 5 gallons, full flow. 80.3 percent were within the proposed maintenance tolerance

at 5 gallons, 5 gpm.

While 7.3 percent of the devices tested were outside current maintenance tolerance on the 5-gallon test, 23.4 percent were outside the

tolerance when all tests are considered. This indicates that approximately two out of every three pumps outside the tolerance at 1, 5, 10, or 15 gallons would have been sealed as correct if only a 5-gallon

draft were employed.

The following information was derived from a study of all tests

:

28.7 percent of the pumps tested were within the proposed

• acceptance tolerance on all drafts and at both rates of flow,

although, as far as is known to the Committee, the maintenance tolerance would be applicable on aU tests. 31.7 percent were within current acceptance tolerance on all tests. 69.2 percent were within the proposed maintenance tolerance on

all drafts and at both rates of flow. 76.6 percent were within current maintenance tolerance on all drafts and at both rates of flow. An additional analysis was made of the pumps which showed an

error of 7 cubic inches on the 5-gallon test. Thirty-nine pumps were

in this group, of which 29 (74.4 percent) were outside the current maintenance tolerance of 12 cubic inches on the 10-gallon test. As a result of these special tests, two things became quite apparent.

The gasoline pump used in retail trade has inherently two separate

and distinct errors. (1) It has an initial error which occurs every

time a draft is started with the register at zero. This error is not

adjustable by means of the normal adjusting element. (2) It has a

ratio or multiplying error which is definable as a certain error per

gallon and which repeats and accumulates with the number of gallons

in a draft. This error is adjustable by means of the normal adjusting

element. These two unknown factors which affect the accuracy of

the device can be determined by carefully conducted tests employing

test drafts of at least three different quantities.

In a majority of instances, the initial error, which is not adjustable

by means of the normal adjusting element, was in excess (over delivery). Since it is necessary to take up airy existing play or loose96
ness and backlash in the various gearings before the register starts recording gallonage, this is to be expected.

This survey also revealed that the ratio error, which is adjustable

by means of the normal adjusting element and which is reasonably

controllable, was predominantly in deficiency (under delivery).

The composite or average of all the devices tested deliver, at full flow, plus y2 cubic inch at one gallon, minus l){ cubic inches at 5 gallons, minus 4 cubic inches at 10 gallons, and minus 6 cubic inches

at 15 gallons.

A hearing was held on Monday preceding the Conference. None

of the 49 persons in attendance, representing the petroleum industry,

the equipment manufacturers, and Conference members, spoke in

favor of adopting the recommended change in tolerances.

One of the points stressed at the hearing was that, if officials adhered to the present code and also observed the expressed meaning of adjustment as set forth' in G-R.4., satisfactory results could be

accomplished under the present code. G-R.4. states, in part, "Whenever equipment is adjusted, the adjustments shall be so made

as to bring performance errors as close as practicable to zero value."

The significance of the word "tolerance" also was discussed, and

it was stipulated by the representatives of industry that they would

direct their efforts, in their maintenance programs, to effect adjustments to as near zero as is practicable, whenever adjustments are made. It is the feeling of the Committee, from the data obtained,

that this practice should be adopted in all States. If this practice were universal, satisfactory results would be attained under the cur- rent table of tolerances.

One point made at the hearing was in relation to test procedure.

It was stated that, under certain conditions, tests should be made on

drafts of different quantities. In addition to the normal five-gallon

test, tests of one gallon, ten gallons, and possibly larger quantities,

should be included. This is in line with the test procedure as outlined on pages 136 and 137 of NBS Handbook 45, as well as with the

amendment adopted by the 37th National Conference to the Code

for Liquid-Measuring Devices, N.I.2., Testing Drafts.

Your Committee recommends no change in Tolerance Table 1 of the Code for Liquid-Measuring Devices.

(The Report of the Committee on Specifications and Tolerances was adopted

by the Conference. This action included adoption of amendments to the scale code and a tentative code for farm milk tanks. These will be printed as Correction Sheets to National Bureau of Standards Handbook 44 and may be obtained,

upon request, from Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards, Washington 25, D. C.) REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON RESOLUTIONS, PRESENTED BY JOHN E. MAHONEY, CHAIRMAN

IN RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE LEADERSHIP OF DR. A. V. ASTIN

Whereas, the National Bureau of Standards, under the direction of Dr. Allen V.

Astin, has continued to render inestimable service and assistance to weights and

measures officials and to allied business and industry; and

Whereas, the unique and outstanding progress in this vital component of our American way of life could not have been realized without such service and assistance, and

Whereas, Dr. Astin, like his predecessors, since the founding of the National Bureau of Standards in 1901, has exhibited keen interest and objective consideration of problems relating to weights and measures supervision; and

97
Whereas, the service of the National Bureau of Standards to weights and measure

administration throughout the Nation has been outstanding during Dr. Astin's administration; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures

does express its confidence in and appreciation to Dr. Astin. APPRECIATION TO OFFICE OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES OF THE NATIONAL

BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Whereas, W. S. Bussey, Chief, and Malcolm W. Jensen, Assistant Chief of the

Office of Weights and Measures, and their able and efficient staff have extended

valuable assistance and guidance to the 38th Conference, for which the Conference

is very grateful; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures,

does appreciate such cooperation and assistance from the Office of Weights and

Measures, National Bureau of Standards, and wishes to make this resolution a

part of the records of this Conference. APPRECIATION TO THOSE PARTICIPATING IN PROGRAM

Whereas, various committees, speakers, and individuals have given generously

j of their valuable time and efforts to make the* 38th National Conference on

W'eights and Measures a success; Therefore, be it Resolved, That the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures does hereby record its grateful appreciation to all who have contributed to the success

of the Conference.APPRECIATION TO COOPERATING OFFICIALS

W

T hereas, the governing officials of the various States, counties, and municipalities, through their manifest interest in weights and measures work, have made

it possible for their respective jurisdictions to be represented at this 38th National

Conference on Weights and Measures; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures,

does appreciate such cooperation and assistance and wishes to make this resolu- tion a part of the records of this Conference. APPRECIATION TO MANAGEMENT OF HEADQUARTERS HOTEL

Whereas, the management of the Wardman Park Hotel has done everything

within its power to make our Conference a success; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures

does express its warmest appreciation and thanks to the management of said hotel for their cordial hospitality and cooperation during our meetings; be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of this Conference transmit a copy of this resolu- tion to the management of the Wardman Park Hotel. APPRECIATION TO THE PRESS, RADIO, AND THE SCALE JOURNAL

Whereas, the press and radio of the City of Washington have been generous

in reporting the activities of our present meeting; and

Whereas, the Scale Journal has likewise been generous in publishing news and

advance notices of our present meeting; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures,

does hereby record its appreciation to the press and radio of the City of Washington and to the Scale Journal. APPRECIATION TO WASHINGTON BASEBALL CLUB

Whereas, the Management of the Washington Baseball Club of the American

League did furnish tickets for the baseball game to the members of this Conference;

Therefore, be it Resolved, That this 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures go on

record showing our appreciation for this fine gesture, and furthermore, be it Resolved, That our Secretary send the Washington Baseball Club a letter of appreciation from this Conference. ON INVESTIGATION FOR ACCURATE DETERMINATION OF AXLE LOADS ON

HIGHWAY VEHICLES

Whereas, the 37th National Conference on Weights and Measures recommended

an extensive and scientific investigation into the entire field of testing axle loads

to devise a method for accurately obtaining a determination of such loads, 98
Whereas, a method of accurately obtaining a determination of axle loads is vitally needed, and

Whereas, for fully ample and just reasons, no more than organizational plans

and procedures for the study were developed during the past year; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures rec- ommends and urges the National Bureau of Standards, in cooperation with the

States, The U. S. Bureau of Public Roads, and the trucking industry, to complete

the extensive and scientific investigation into the entire field of testing axle loads

in order to devise a method of accurately obtaining a determination of such loads. APPRECIATION TO INDUSTRY

Whereas, the representatives of industry by their support of the National Conference contribute materially to the accomplishments of the Conference, and

Whereas, the support from industry also expedites understanding and clarifi- cation of mutual problems; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures,

expresses its recognition of and appreciation for the cooperation of industry and

its manifest interest in developing adequate weights and measures administration. APPRECIATION OF PUBLICATIONS

Wliereas, the dissemination of weights and measures information and education

is a field in which commercial publishing interests have not entered to any extent; and

Whereas, printed information and education is a necessary element in the

efficient progress of any governmental function; and

Whereas, the personnel of the Publications Section of the National Bureau of Standards have been untiring in their efforts to make available, with both accuracy and dispatch, such printed material on this subject as is indicated essential; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures,

does acknowledge and appreciate such aid and assistance, and wishes to make

this resolution a part of the records of this Conference. ON CONSOLIDATIONS OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ACTIVITIES WITH OTHER

ACTIVITIES OF GOVERNMENT

Whereas, weights and measures supervision is both a responsibility of govern- ment and a protector of the people; and

Whereas, the technical requirements of weights and measures inspection are such as to demand continued study and attention; and

Whereas, it is known to this body that occasional efforts are being made to consolidate weights and measures administration with other inspectional activities

of government; and

Whereas, this activity is of a special and technical nature and does not lend

itself to combination with other diversified inspection activities; and

Whereas, the benefit of weights and measures supervision, both to consumers and to businesses and industries allied with the activity, is reduced by such

consolidations; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures

desires to go on record as opposing such consolidations which are designed for economy but tend to bring about inefficiency through the loss of specialization

and technical advance. ON FUNCTION OF STANDING COMMITTEES OF CONFERENCE

Whereas, the several standing committees of the National Conference on

Weights and Measures do much research and develop many worthwhile

recommendations which are adopted by this Conference, and

Whereas, the eventual promulgation and enforcement of these recommendations

by the several States, counties, and cities is most important to uniform and

efficient weights and measures administration, and

Whereas, the President of this Conference has suggested that the activities

of the several standing committees be expanded to include the furnishing of necessary leadership in bringing about the official adoption and enforcement

of Conference recommendations, Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures,

go on record as authorizing the several standing committees of the Conference

to include the furnishing of leadership as one of their regular functions. 99
ON PREPARATION OF EDUCATIONAL MOTION PICTURE FILMS

Whereas, it is acknowledged by all that audio-visual aids are of supreme

benefit in all fields of education; and

Whereas, both efficiency and true value of adequate weights and measures

supervision are dependent upon education both of participating personnel and

of the consuming public; and

Whereas, this is a problem nation-wide in scope and best solved by nation-wide

consideration; Therefore, be it Resolved, That this, the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures,

recommends and solicits the Federal Government, through its National Bureau of Standards, consider undertaking and instituting a project of planning, preparing,

and making available to the several State weights and measures officers a series of motion pictures, in color and sound, said motion pictures to cover such topics

as "Precision Calibration of Standards," "Value Versus Cost of Adequate Weights

and Measures Supervision," "The Consumer's Interest in Weights and Measures

Administration," "The National Bureau of Standards," and the like. (Signed) John E. Mahoney, Chairman,

C. D. Baucom,

J. C. Goll,

M. O. NlCKON,

J. M. O'Neil,

W. H. Roberts,

Committee on Resolutions. (The report of the Resolutions Committee was adopted by the Conference.)

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE TREASURER

May 1, 1953 Balance on hand May 1, 1952 $1, 014. 03 Receipts:

Mav 23—Registration fees—1952 Conference 334

at $5.00 $1, 670. 00

Interest accrued, May 1, 1952, to May

1, 1953__ 16. 71

1, 686. 71 Total : 2,700.74

Disbursements : May 20-23, 1952—

Expenses of 37th National Conference 1, 506. 29 Balance on hand May 1, 1953 1, 194. 45

(Signed) George F. Austin, Treasurer. (The report of the Treasurer was adopted by the Conference.)

REPORT OF THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON NOMINATIONS, PRESENTED BY C. A. BAKER, CHAIRMAN, AND ELECTION

OF OFFICERS

The Committee submitted the following nominations for office in

the National Conference to serve during the ensuing year, or until

such time as their successors are elected. OFFICERS

For President: A. V. Astin, Director, National Bureau of Standards. For Vice Presidents: George F. Austin, Jr., of Detroit, Mich.; James E. Boyle,

of Maine; Frank M. Greene, of Connecticut; J. Roy Jones, of South Carolina; James W. Reese, of Iowa; Anthony C. Samenfink, of Rochester, N. Y. For Secretary: W. S. Bussey, National Bureau of Standards. For Treasurer: J. P. McBride, of Massachusetts.

100
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

For members of the Executive Committee: S. H. Christie, of New Jersey; J. F. Corrigan, of Rhode Island; R. L. Flanagan, of Oklahoma; Arthur Forrest,

of Claremont, N. H.; J. W. D. Harvey, of Georgia; H. E. Howard, of Miami,

Fla.; G. L. Johnson, of Kentucky; 0. A. Kirkland, of Texas; A. J. Mayer,

of Louisiana; J. I. Moore, of North Carolina; H. J. McDade, of San Diego

County, Calif.; W. H. Roberts, of Vigo County, Ind.; S. H. Seighman,

of Pennsylvania; W. K. Tripple, of Norfolk, Va.; C. J. Wills, of Portland,

Maine.

(Signed) C. A. Baker, Chairman,

Nalls Berryman,

E. R. Fisher,

J. T. Kennedy,

R. S. ACKERMAN,

C. M. Fuller,

Tom Webb,

Committee on Nominations.

(The report of the Committee on Nominations was adopted and the officers were elected unanimously.)

(R. W. Searles, Chaplain, closed the meeting with prayer, and the Thirty- seventh National Conference on Weights and Measures adjourned at 11:30 a. m.)

MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE CONFERENCE

Immediately following adjournment of the 38th National Conference on Weights and Measures, a meeting was held of the newly elected Executive Committee and the chairmen of the standing committees. Present at this meeting

were eight of the nine officers, ten- of the sixteen Executive Committee members,

four of the five chairmen of standing committees, and the Conference Chaplain.

The meeting was presided over by the Conference President, Dr. A. V. Astin. Among the decisions reached bv the Executive Committee were the following:

The 39th National Conference will be held May 17-21, 1954. These five days

will include a full day of committee hearings on Monday, two sessions on Tuesday, one session on Wednesday (this session to be held at the National Bureau of Standards and to be followed by afternoon tours of the Bureau laboratories), two sessions on Thursday, and one session on Friday.

The Sheraton-Park Hotel (formerly Wardman Park Hotel) was selected as the headquarters for the 39th National Conference. The entertainment, both for the delegates and their ladies, will be approximately the same as during the past several years. Detailed arrangements for the Conference were left to the Conference Secretary.

It was decided that Monday of the Conference week should be made a definite and formal part of the meeting. This day will be used by the various standing

committees for hearings on subjects of interest to the group. All agreed that

participation in these hearings by weights and measures officials and others is both desirable and beneficial. An additional suggestion was made that the East Building Auditorium on the grounds of the National Bureau of Standards be retained for discussions on Wednesday afternoon. If such arrangements can be made, these discussions

will be participated in by those delegates who do not wish to take part in the

tour of the Bureau and by members of the Bureau staff. The Executive Committee expressed the hope that all persons who attended

the 38th National Conference will address comments concerning same to the Conference Secretary, Mr. W. S. Bussey, Office of Weights and Measures, National Bureau of Standards. Whenever possible, these comments should include suggestions for the program of the 39th National Conference. Matters for consideration by any of the several standing committees also should be submitted

early. Rollin E. Meek of Indiana, who served as Attendance Chairman of the Executive Committee for the 38th National Conference, gave a report on the activities

of the Committee in this regard. Mr. Meek was commended both for his efforts and the results obtained therefrom.

J. Roy Jones of South Carolina was appointed Attendance Chairman for the 39th National Conference.

101
PERSONS ATTENDING THE CONFERENCE

DELEGATES—STATE, CITY, AND COUNTY OFFICIALS

ALABAMA

State W. C. Beatty, Inspector of Weights and Measures, Clayton.

ARIZONA

State Dick Feank, State Inspector of Weights and

Measures, State Office Building, Phoenix.

CALIFORNIA

State James E. Brenton, Chief, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture,

Mull Building, Sacramento. County

:

Alameda William A. Kerlin, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 333 Fifth Street, Oakland. Los Angeles Charles M. Fuller, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 3200 North Main Street, Los

Angeles.

San Diego Herbert J. McDade, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 1480 F Street, San Diego.

COLORADO

County: Denver Harry N. Duff, City and County Sealer of Weights and Measures, 4328 York Street, Denver. CONNECTICUT

State Frank M. Greene, Chief, Division of Weights

and Measures, Food and Drug Commission,

State Office Building, Hartford. Frank J. Delaney, State Inspector of Weights

and Measures. County

:

Fairfield William E. Sheehy, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, County Court House, Bridgeport.

Ernest R. Wilson, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures. Hartford Fred E. McKinney, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, County Building, 95 Washington

Street, Hartford. Joseph J. Fanelli, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures. New London Donald A. Fraser, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Salem. Tolland William F. Masinda, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, West Willington.

City:

Bridgeport Louis Snow, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 925 Main Street. Hartford Nathan Kalechman, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Municipal Building.

Manchester Winston S. C. Ttjrkington, Sealer of Weights

and Measures, 137 Pearl Street. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets

300 Indiana Avenue NW.

Washington

District J. Thomas Kennedy, Director. James G. Dance, Deputy Director. John M. Boucher, Supervisor.

102
District-. G. Stuart Reeder, Supervisor.

J. T. Bennick, Inspector and Investigator.

Walter W. Brandt, Inspector and Investigator.

Leo F. Brooks, Inspector and Investigator.

William T. Brunson, Inspector and Investigator.

Walter R. Cornelius, Inspector and Investigator. Leo A. Gnotta, Inspector and Investigator.

Fenton C. Harbour, Inspector and Investigator.

William H. Jennings, Inspector and Investigator. Theodore B. Middleton, Inspector and Investigator.

Ralph A. Montgomery, Inspector and Investigator. Bernard A. Pettit, Inspector and Investigator.

Francis M. Warner, Inspector and Investigator. Woodrow W. Wells, Inspector and Investigator.

FLORIDA

State Nalls Berryman, Supervisor, Weights and

Measures Division, Department of Agriculture,

Nathan Mayo Building, Tallahassee. William H. Frays, State Inspector of Weights

and Measures, 1427 Park Circle, Tampa.

City:

Jacksonville Howard E. Crawford, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 431 West Eighth Street. Miami Harvey E. Howard, Supervisor of Weights and

Measures, Department of Public Welfare,

P. O. Box 1861. GEORGIA

State H. W. Striplin, Supervisor, Division of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture, State Capitol, Atlanta. Lawrence W. Henry, State Weights and

Measures Inspector.

John W. D. Harvey, Assistant Chemist, State

Oil Laboratory, Department of Revenue, 524

State Office Building, Atlanta. ILLINOIS

State Lowell D. Oranger, Superintendent, Division

of Foods, Dairies, and Standards, 160 North

LaSalle Street, Suite 1600, Chicago.

Merrill M. Emerick, Assistant Superintendent,

Division of Foods, Dairies, and Standards,

Springfield.

City: Chicago Irvine M. Levy, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 608 City HaU. Frank J. Fitzgerald, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures. INDIANA

State Rollin E. Meek, Director, Division of Weights

and Measures, Board of Health, 1330 West

Michigan Street, Indianapolis.

John M. Galloway, Deputy State Inspector.

County

:

Grant Reuben C. Parks, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Marion.

St. Joseph Bert S. Cichowicz, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 5718 Grant Road, South Bend.

Vigo William H. Roberts, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Terre Haute. 103
City:Fort Wayne. . James A. Hilgemann, Deputy State Inspector

of Weights and Measures, 301 South Clinton

Street- Gary.. Cleo C. Morgan, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. Indianapolis-. __ Harry H. Brunner, Supervising Inspector of Weights and Measures, City Hall. Terre Haute John T. Harper, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, City Building.

IOWA

State James W. Reese, Supervisor, Division of Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, Des Moines.

KANSAS

State J. Fred True, State Sealer, Weights and

Measures Division, Board of Agriculture, 915 Harrison Street, Topeka.

KENTUCKY

George L. Johnson, Director, Division of Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, New State Capitol, Frankfort. Vernon Herbert, Investigator, Division of Weights and Measures, City Hall. Thomas Hester, Investigator, Division of Weights and Measures. LOUISIANA

State A. J. Mayer, Director, Division of Weights and

Measures, P. O. Box 4292, Capitol Station, Baton Rouge.

MAINE

State James A. Boyle, Deputy State Sealer, Bureau of Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, State House, Augusta.

City: Portland Charles James Wills, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 389 Congress Street. MARYLAND

Dr. Paul E. Nystrom, Chief, State Department

of Markets, University of Maryland, College Park. John E. Mahoney, Superintendent of Weights

and. Measures, State Department of Markets. Frank J. ' Vittek, Chief Inspector of Weights

and Measures, 25 Susquehanna Avenue, Towson. George A. Klein, Assistant Inspector of Weights

and Measures.

A. Morton Thomas, Director, Department of Inspection and Licenses, Court House, Rockville. Wilford Ellis Dayhoff, Inspector of Weights

and Measures. George H. Leithauser, Senior Assistant Superintendent, Division of Weights and Measures, 1106 Municipal Building.

Edwin E. Jaffa, City Inspector of Weights and

Measures. 104

State

City: Louisville

State

County

:

Baltimore

Montgomery

City:

Baltimore
MASSACHUSETTS

State - John P. McBride, Director of Standards and

Necessaries of Life, Department of Labor and

Industries, 194 State House, Boston.

T. J. Dacey, State Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Worcester.

City:

Arlington James J. Dolan, Sealer, Weights and Measures Department, Arlington Town Hall. Cambridge Joseph M. O'Neil, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Municipal Building. Chelsea Frederick J. Ryan, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 88 Parkway.

Medford John J. Carew, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

City Hall. MICHIGAN

State Miles A. Nelson, Chief, Bureau of Marketing

and Enforcement, Department of Agriculture, 725 State Office Building, Lansing.

Clyde O. Cottom, Supervising Inspector of Weights and Measures. County: Washtenaw George P. Smith, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Court House, Ann Arbor.

City:

Dearborn Alexander Stacy, Administrative Assistant to Mayor, City Hall. John Jay Hubbard, Administrative Assistant,

7055 Mead Avenue. Mitchell O. Nickon, Superintendent Department of Licenses, Weights, and Measures, 4731 Korte Street. Detroit Hazen L. Funk, Commissioner and City Sealer, Department of Purchases and Supplies, Bureau

of Weights and Measures, 740 Elmwood

Avenue. George F. Austin, Jr., Deputy Sealer. William B. Heaslip, Supervising Inspector.

John T. Daniell, Inspector.

James H. Hitchings, Inspector.

Charles D. Marsden, Inspector.

Victor F. Steinhart, Inspector.

Grand Rapids Otto Skodsholm, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 301 Market Avenue S. W.

Lansing Walter M. Saxton, City Sealer and Marketmaster, 333 North Cedar Street. Muskegon B. T. Sullivan, City Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. Pontiac Walter A. Baerwolp, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 8 North Perry Street. MINNESOTA

State Warren Czaia, State Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 325 South Third Street, Minneapolis.

Melvin C. Ilstrup, State Inspector of Weights

and Measures. Rudolph E. Thalin, State Inspector of Weights

and Measures.

City: Minneapolis Russell S. Ackerman, Superintendent, Department of Licenses, Weights, and Measures,

City Hall. MISSISSIPPI

State Adlia Morgan, Director of Petroleum Taxes,

Office of£Vehicle Comptroller, Jackson. 269870—53 8 105
MISSOURI

State L. C. Carpenter, Commissioner, Department

of Agriculture, Jefferson City.

Al E. Hard, Administrative Assistant. City: University City D. J. Almon, General Inspector, City Hall. NEBRASKA

City: Omaha Willis W. Gray, Chief Inspector of Weights and

Measures, Department of Public Affairs, Room 100 City Hall. , NEVADA

State E. L. Randall, Department of Weights and

Measures, Public Service Division, P. O. Box

719, Reno. NEW HAMPSHIRE

State Clement A. Lyon, Director, Division of Markets

and Standards, Department of Agriculture,

Concord.

Alfred H. Dittrich, Chief Inspector, Bureau of Weights and Measures, Division of Markets

and Standards.

City:

Claremont Arthur Forrest, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 45 Hanover Street. Manchester Fernand A. Genest, City Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 180 Franklin Street. NEW JERSEY

State Joseph G. Rogers, Superintendent, Division of Weights and Measures, Department of Law

and Public Safety, 187 West Hanover Street, Trenton. Archie T. Smith, Assistant Superintendent.

Samuel H. Christie, Senior Inspector.

Joseph A. Murphy, Assistant Deputy Attorney

General, Department of Law and Public

Safety, State House. County

:

Bergen Michael J. Santimauro, Superintendent of Weight and Measures, 66 Zabriskie Street, Hackensack.

Ernest E. Dawson, Assistant Superintendent of Weights and Measures.

Burlington Paul F. Nunn, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Centerton Road, Masonville. Camden Albert C. Becker, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, City Hall, Camden.

Cumberland Alfred Lirio, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Bridgeton.

Winfield K. Thompson, Assistant Superintendent. Gloucester Martin J. Caulfield, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, Westville Road, Almonesson. Mercer Ralph M. Bodenweiser, Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Court House, Trenton. Morris Del G. Nelson, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Morristown.

Passaic William Miller, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Administration Building, Paterson. Union James M. Dietz, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, Court House, Elizabeth. 106
City:

Bayonne Walter Flynn, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, 469 Boulevard.

Clifton Felix J. Sandri, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. Englewood Leonard DeRienzo, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, City Hall. Garfield Charles Benanti, Municipal Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Police Building, Somerset Street. Jersey City John S. Burke, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. Passaic Paul DeVries, Superintendent of Weights and

Measures, P. O. Box 663. Joseph Shaw, Assistant Superintendent of Weights and Measures, Municipal Building. Paterson Joseph P. Leonard, Superintendent of Weights

and Measures, 115 Van Houten Street. William J. Kehoe, Assistant Superintendent of Weights and Measures. Union City Alfred O. Oslund, Superintendent, Department

of Weights and Measures, Palisade Avenue and

38th Street. NEW YORK

State Clement A. Baker, Director, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Department of Agriculture and

Markets, State Office Building, Albany.

County:

Genessee Glenn A. Pullman, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 19 Buffalo Street, Bergen.

Monroe Earl D. Hubble, County Sealer, Department of Weights and Measures, Room B, 1400 South

Avenue, Rochester. Nassau Robert Williams, Sealer of Weights and Measures, Old County Court House Annex, Mineola.

William Kirk, Jr., Assistant Sealer of Weights

and Measures. Niagara Henry C. Hulshoff, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 17 High Street, Lockport.

Oswego Leland M. Flower, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Lycoming.

City:

Binghamton Harry A. Lason, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 60 Robinson Street. Lackawanna John J. Seres, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 84 Rosary Avenue.

Rochester Anthony C. Samenfink, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Department of Commerce, Rochester Food Terminal.

Yonkers S. John Dimase, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

City Hall. NORTH CAROLINA

State C. D. Baucom, Superintendent, Weights and

Measures Division, Department of Agriculture, 415 Agriculture Building, Raleigh.

John I. Moore, Supervisor.

Charles E. Dolan, Inspector of Weights and

Measures.

S. M. Woolfolk, Inspector of Weights and

Measures. NORTH DAKOTA

State J. C. Goll, Chief Inspector, Weights and Measures Department, Public Service Commission,

Bismarck.

Earl W. Wilcox, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, P. O. Box 1515, Jamestown. 107
OHIO

State V. D. Campbell, Deputy State Sealer, Division

of Foods and Dairies, Department of Agriculture, Room 710 State Office Building,

Columbus.

County

:

Clinton Harold E. Morris, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures, 610 N. Mulberry Street, Wil- mington.

Medina Robert W. Searles, Deputy Sealer of Weights

and Measures, Court House, Medina.

City:

Akron Robert K. Slough, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 102 Municipal Building. Cincinnati William E. G. Rhein, Superintendent, Markets,

Weights and Measures, Market House, Sixth and Plum Streets. Lorain Gabor Toth, Sealer of Weights and Measures, 3019 Caroline Avenue. OKLAHOMA

State T. C. Beck, Assistant Director, Marketing

Division, Board of Agriculture, 122 Capitol

Building, Oklahoma City. R. L. Flanagan, Supervisor of Weights and

Measures.

City: Oklahoma City Clarence M. Fowler, Inspector, 507 Municipal

Building.

PENNSYLVANIA

State Joseph F. Blickley, Director, Bureau of Standard Weights and Measures, Department of Internal Affairs, Capitol Building, Harrisburg.

Spencer H. Seighman, Assistant Director. James R. Redclift, Senior Inspector of Weights

and Measures, Box 109, Shenandoah.

City:Erie Paul F. Watson, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. Philadelphia James J. Powers, Supervisor, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Room 306 City Hall. RHODE ISLAND

State Edward R. Fisher, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, Department of Labor, State House,

Providence.

James F. Corrigan, Deputy State Sealer of Weights and Measures.

City: Cranston Armand E. Renzi, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 14 Tulip Circle, Garden City, Cranston. SOUTH CAROLINA

State J. Roy Jones, Commissioner, Department of Agriculture, P. O. Box 1080, Columbia.

Carl H. Stender, Assistant Commissioner.

Alex H. Gibert, Director, Bureau of Inspection.

Lowrie M. Beacham, Field Representative,

Department of Agriculture, P. O. Box 432, Spartanburg.

Carl S. Hogue, Field Representative, Department of Agriculture, P. O. Box 1080, Columbia.

TENNESSEE

City:

Memphis C. S. Meehan, Inspector of Weights and Measures, 590 Washington Street. Nashville Tom Webb, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

300 Demonbreun Street. 108
TEXAS

John L. Clark, State Inspector of Weights

and Measures, Division of Weights and

Measures, Department of Agriculture, State

Office Building, Austin.

O. A. Kirkland, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 3422 West Jefferson Boulevard,

Dallas.

J. D. Walton, Supervisor, Weights, Measures,

and Markets, 311 City Hall. Robert Oliver DeVillier, Deputy Sealer of Weights and Measures, City Hall. UTAH

Edwin C. Westwood, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, 118 East First Street. VERMONT

George E. Carpenter, Supervisor, Division of Weights and Measures, Department of Agriculture, Montpelier. VIRGINIA

J. H. Meek, Director, Division of Markets,

Department of Agriculture and Immigration,

1200 East Main Street, Richmond.

R. D. Thompson, Supervisor, Weights and

Measures Section.

J. A. Rosen, State Inspector of Weights and

Measures, 3126 Lamb Avenue, Richmond.

C. F. Wingfield, State Inspector of Weights

and Measures, 202 Hanover Avenue, Ashland. Clarence E. Whitman, Field Supervisor, Scale Maintenance, Department of Highways,

Richmond.

W. K. Tripple, Chief, Bureau of Weights and

Measures, City Market Building. C. R. Thompson, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

Room 205 City Hall. Claude R. Branch, Assistant Inspector of Weights and Measures. Conway C. Mundy, Chief, Bureau of Weights

and Measures, Room 121 Mosque Building, Laurel and Main Streets. M. L. Rice, Inspector of Weights and Measures.

J. N. Whitlow, Inspector of Weights and

Measures. James M. Hudgins, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, City Market Building.

WASHINGTON

Walter L. Daniels, Director of Licenses and

Standards, Department of Finance, Office of the Comptroller, 100 County-City Building. D. M. Turnbull, Supervisor, Division of Licenses and Standards. WISCONSIN

C. L. Jackson, Chief, Division of Economic

Practices, Department of Agriculture, State

Capitol.

109
City:Janesville E. W. Schellenberger, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. Kenosha Felix Mayer, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

City Hall. Madison C. D. Kenison, Inspector of Weights and

Measures, E. Mifflin & Blount Streets. Milwaukee _ Louis E. Witt, Sealer of Weights and Measures,

1331 North Fifth Street. Racine Robert J. Zierten, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. West Allis Arthur E. LaBoda, Sealer of Weights and

Measures, City Hall. HONORARY LIFE MEMBER

Ralph W. Smith, 700 Elm Street, Chevy Chase, Md.

DELEGATES—NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

Director's Office: A. V. Astin, Director. W. R. Brode, Associate Director. A. T. McPherson, Associate Director.

L. J. Briggs, Director Emeritus.

E. C. Crittenden, Consultant. William S. Bussey, Chief, Office of Weights and Measures. Malcolm W. Jensen, Assistant Chief, Office of Weights and Measures. H. Haig Russell, Chief, Scale Section, Office of Weights and Measures. Charles H. Oakley, Coordinator, Office of Weights and Measures. Herbert L. Badger, Physicist, Office of Weights and Measures. Allen A. Williams, Mechanical Inspector, Office of Weights and Measures. Mrs. K. M. Schwarz, Attorney-Editor, Office of Weights and Measures. Mrs. F. C. Bell, Chief Clerk, Office of Weights and Measures. Mrs. R. E. Taylor, Clerk-Stenographer, Office of Weights and Measures. William R. Tilley, Chief, Technical Reports Section, Office of Scientific Publications. John Friedman, Office of Scientific Publications. Bernard H. Barbour, Office of Scientific Publications. Applied Mathematics Division: Churchill Eisenhart, Chief, Statistical Engineering Section. W. J. Youden, Consultant, Statistical Engineering Section. Atomic and Radiation Physics Division: Lela J. Hamilton, Neutron Measurements Section.

Electricity Division: Earl M. Otto, Chemist, Electrochemistry Section. Mechanics Division: H. S. Bean, Chief, Capacity, Density, and Fluid Meters Section. B. C. Keysar, Capacity, Density, and Fluid Meters Section. B. L. Wilson, Chief, Engineering Mechanics Section. R. R. Bouche, Mechanical Engineer, Engineering Mechanics Section. Francis C. Falkinburg, Mechanical Engineer, Engineering Mechanics

Section. Roscoe L. Bloss, Physicist, Engineering Mechanics Section. Alvin C. Legate, Physicist, Engineering Mechanics Section. Douglas R. Tate, Physicist, Engineering Mechanics Section.

L. B. Macurdy, Chief, Mass Section. T. W. Lashof, Assistant Chief, Mass Section. Eleanor M. Clinton, Physicist, Mass Section. Mildred W. Jones, Scientific Aid, Mass Section. Nancy J. Tighe, Mass Section. Optics & Metrology Division: Wilmer Souder, Consultant.

L. V. Judson, Chief, Length Section. Ralph W. Crouch, Jr., Photometry and Colorimetry Section. Organic and Fibrous Materials Division: William D. Appel, Chief, Textiles Section. Planning Staff: James J. Cockerill, Management Analyst.

Thomas C. Leffingwell, Management Analyst.

110
GUESTS REPRESENTING UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

U. S. Department of Agriculture:

J. Roy Allgyer, Research Coordinator, Agricultural Research Administration, Washington 25, D. C. Henry Marston, Research Coordinator, Agricultural Research Administration, Washington 25, D. C. Charles L. Richard, Supervisor of Scales and Weighing, Livestock Branch,

3530 South Building, Washington 25, D. C. U. S. Department of Commerce:

Craig R. Sheaffer, Assistant Secretary for Internal Affairs, Washington 25, D. C. U. S. Federal Supply Service: R. M. Greene, Technologist, Alcott Hall, Washington, D. C. G. L. Miller, Federal Supply Service, Alcott Hall, Washington, D. C.

U. S. Food and Drug Administration:

Sumner C. Rowe, Chemist, Food Division, Washington 25, D. C. U. S. Navy Department:

George I. Dewey, Chairman, Technical Committee on Cordage, Bureau of Ships, Washington 25, D. C. R. W. Webster, Materials Engineer, Bureau of Ships, Washington 25, D. C. U. S. Tariff Commission:

C. A. Schoffstatt, Member, Technical Committee on Cordage, Washington

25, D. C. U. S. Air Force Department:

Hassell C. Pettus, General Foreman, Instrument Repair, Norton Air Force Base, San Bernardino, California. Brewster H. Woodburn, Measuring Devices Repairman and Inspector, Norton Air Force Base, San Bernardino, California. GUESTS REPRESENTING MANUFACTURERS OF WEIGHING AND

MEASURING DEVICES

Ace Glass Incorporated: C. I. Kramme, Vineland, N. J. American Can Company: Harold L. Duenkel, 100 Park Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. American Meter Company: W. V. Stockton, Jr., District Sales Manager, P. O. Box D, Wynnewood, Pa. Balwin-Lima-Hamilton Corporation: Malcolm L. Hall, Manager, Testing

Equipment Department, Philadelphia, Pa. Black & Decker Manufacturing Co.: E. E. Powell, Manager, Loadometer

Department, Towson 4, Md.

Bloomer Brothers Co.: Raynor M. Holmes, Research Engineer, Newark, N. Y. Bowser, Inc.:

I. W. Baldwin, Regional Manager, 830 Washington Building, Washington

5, D. C. Walter M. Harks, Vice President, Fort Wayne, Ind. James B. Marsh, Assistant Regional Manager, 830 Washington Building,

Washington 5, D. C. Brodie, Ralph N., Co., Inc.: Don W. Kingsley, 550 South Columbus Avenue, Mt. Vernon, N. Y.

C. J. McCaffrey, Vice President, 550 South Columbus Avenue, Mt. Vernon, N. Y.

Chatillon, John, & Sons: George C. Reiley, Vice President—Sales, 85 Cliff Street, New York 38, N. Y.

Continental Can Company, Inc.: Warren D. Ayres, Assistant Product Sales Manager, 349 Oraton Street, Newark 4, N. J. Control Engineering Corporation: R. Byron White, Engineering Division, 560

Providence Highway, Norwood, Mass. Creamery Package Manufacturing Co.: L. T. Gustafson, 1243 West Washington

Boulevard, Chicago 7, 111. Dairy Equipment Co.: K. S. Hart, Vice President, 1444 East Washington

Avenue, Madison 3, Wis.

Damrow Brothers Company: Peter P. Weidenbruch, President, 196-234 Western Avenue, Fond du Lac, Wis. Detecto Scales, Inc.: Mrs. Carrie G. Woodland, Representative, Woodland's

Temple Grove, Fellsmere, Fla. Dixie Cup Co. : Arthur J. Nolan, Vice President, Easton, Pa. Ill
Erie Meter Systems, Inc.: Paul R. Fishburn, Chief Engineer, P. O. Box 559, Erie, Pa. William B. Johnson, Jr., Manager of Sales, P. O. Box 559, Erie, Pa. Exact Weight Scale Co.: E. A. LeVay, 120 West 25th Street, Baltimore 18, Md.

W. A. Scheurer, Vice President, 944 W'est 5th Avenue, Columbus 8, Ohio. James F. Sullivan, Chief Engineer, 944 West 5th Avenue, Columbus 8, Ohio. Oliver H. Watson, 608 Dearborn Street, Chicago 5, 111. Ex-Cell-0 Corporation: Gene R. Andre, Pure-Pak Division, 1200 Oakman

Boulevard, Detroit 32, Mich.

Fairbanks, Morse & Co.

:

C. G. Gehringer, Scale Division, 600 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago 5, 111. C. A. Hennie, Field Engineer, 657 East 25th Street, Baltimore 18, Md.

Frederick C. Johnson, 80 Broad Street, New York 4, N. Y. Jerome C. Kenney, Field Engineer, 726 East 25th St., Baltimore 29, Md.

F. Hugh Ward, Sales Engineer, 1000 Vermont Avenue, Washington 5, D. C. Fisher Governor Co.: Walter H. Hoagland, Eastern Manager, 212 East State

Street, Westport, Conn.

Forschner, R. H., Co.: Richard A. Forschner, General Manager, 205 Third

Avenue, New York 3, N. Y.

Fuller, H. J., Co.: H. J. Fuller, President, 1371 West Third Avenue, Columbus

12, Ohio.

Gilbert & Barker Manufacturing Co.: Clifford A. Bellows, Manager, Patents and Weights and Measures, West

Springfield, Mass. William Keay, Manager, Sales Service, West Springfield, Mass. Joseph A. Logan, Consulting Engineer, West Springfield, Mass. Gilmore Industries, Inc.: G. E. Di Geronimo, 5511 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland 3, Ohio. Girton Manufacturing Co.: Paul K. Girton, President, Millville, Pa. Gould Equipment Co.: Earlon W. Barrett, Representative, Cape Elizabeth,

Maine.

Gurley, W. & L. E.: Franklin G. Williams, Washington Representative, 5514

Nevada Avenue, N. W., Washington 15, D. C. Hobart Manufacturing Co.: Murray W. Craig, Weights and Measures Representative, Dayton Scale Division, Troy, Ohio. Ernest A. Reussenzehn, Chief Scale Inspector, Dayton Scale Division, 448

Huffman Avenue, Dayton 3, Ohio. Howe Scale Co.: R. A. Parham, Branch Manager, 1300 Curtain Avenue, Balti- more 18, Md.

Huffman Manufacturing Co.: Robert E. Dorman, General Manager, Automotive Division, P. O. Box 310, Delphos, Ohio.

International Paper Co.: Kermit C. Gardner, Sales Representative, Single Service Division, 3815 Chamberlayne Avenue, Richmond 27, Va.

Lily-Tulip Cup Corporation:

Keith B. Mount, Assistant to Vice President, 122 East 42nd Street, New

York 17, N. Y. Richard S. Wechsler, Counsel, 122 East 42nd Street, New York 17, N. Y. Marathon Corporation: Ben A. Rafoth, Dairv Development Supt., Menasha,

Wis. Marvel Rack Manufacturing Co., Inc.: Charles M. McCarthy, President, 24 North First Street, Minneapolis 1, Minn.

Mclntyre, J. J., & Sons: John Lawrence McIntyre, Philadelphia 11, Pa. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.: Howard Ecker, 900 Fauquier Avenue,

St. Paul 6, Minn.

Moody, Edward G., & Son, Inc.: Edward G. Moody, Box 130, Nashua, N. H. Neptune Meter Co.: H. Alfred Lentz, Jr., 14 Bell's Mill Road, Philadelphia 18, Pa. Walter H. Sieger, Assistant to General Sales Manager, 50 West 50th

Street, New York 20, N. Y. Emmett F. Wehmann, Engineer, 192 Jackson Avenue, Long Island City, N. Y.

Owens-Illinois Glass Co.: J. D. Laird, Chief Specification & Service Engineer,

Toledo 1, Ohio. Penn Scale Manufacturing Co., Inc.: Sydney Black, President, 150 West Berks

Street, Philadelphia 22, Pa. Republic Steel Corporation: Howard L. Zupp, Corporation Weighing Inspector, 333 Delaware Avenue, N. E., Massillon, Ohio. 112
Richardson Scale Co.: Arthur J. Burke, Chief Engineer, 668 Van Houten

Avenue, Clifton, N. J. Rockwell Manufacturing Co.:

J. E. Dimmett, Engineering Department, 400 North Lexington Avenue,

Pittsburgh 8, Pa. Edward R. Eyler, Sales Engineer, 12 Mayflower Court, Baltimore, Md.

Charles B. Johnson, Consulting Engineer, 400 North Lexington Avenue,

Pittsburgh 8, Pa. James H. Judge, Sales Manager, Gasoline, Oil & Industrial Meters, 400

North Lexington Avenue, Pittsburgh 8, Pa. Charles H. Obrock, Sales Engineer, 7701 Empire State Building, New

York, N. Y.

Sanitary Scale Co.: Harold V. Smith, District Manager, Belvidere, 111. Sealright Co., Inc.: Earl Foster, Chief Chemist, Fulton, N. Y. Seraphin Test Measure Co.: T. A. Seraphin, General Manager, 1314 North

Seventh Street, Philadelphia 22, Pa. Smith, A. O., Corporation: H. D. Leisenring, Sales Manager—Eastern Area, 250 Park Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. Southwest Pump Co.: R. Eugene Risser, Jr., Vice President, Bonham, Texas. Stimpson Computing Scale Co.: Frank M. Doyne, General Distributor, 468

Weaver Street, Larchmont, N. Y.

Streeter-Amet Co.: George F. Graham, Assistant Director of Sales, 4101 Ravenswood Avenue,

Chicago 13, 111. Robert T. Isham, Vice President, 4101 Ravenswood Avenue, Chicago 13, 111. Sutherland Paper Co.: Roy R. Campbell, Product Development, 607 Drury

Lane, Kalamazoo, Mich.

Tel-A-Dial Scale Co.: Roy R. Dunlap, 401 Wyandotte, Kansas City, Mo.

Thatcher Glass Manufacturing Co., Inc.: James Arrandale, Director, Qualitv Control & Service, 623 West Water Street, Elmira, N. Y. Tokheim Oil Tank & Pump Co.: William E. Louthan, Service Manager, Fort Wayne 1, Ind. Toledo Scale Co.

:

Stanley Q. Bennett, Manager of Weights and Measures and Sanitary

Standards, Toledo 1, Ohio. D. J. Boudinot, Assistant General Sales Manager, Toledo 1, Ohio. E. C. Smith, Industrial Division, 213-215 East 27th Street, New York 16, N. Y. Trans Weigh Co.: George T. Cook, Engineer, Wayne, Pa. Troemner, Henry:

Edward J. Furey, General Manager, 911 Arch Street, Philadelphia 7, Pa. Charles F. Rosica, Sales Manager, 911 Arch Street, Philadelphia 7, Pa. Charles V. Rosica, Representative, 911 Arch Street, Philadelphia 7, Pa. Turner, Edward H., Proprietor, 79 Kenneth Place, New Hyde Park, N. Y.

U. S. Slicing Machine Co.: Matthew D. Ribble, Special Representative, Standard Computing Scale Division, La Porte, Ind. Veeder-Root, Inc.:

J. J. Brannick, Sales Manager, Computer Division, 915 Van Buren Street, N. E., Auburn, Ind. Austin E. McKeever, Sales Manager, Master Meter Duplicator Division,

Hartford 2, Conn. David J. Post, Vice President, Hartford 2, Conn. Wayne Pump Co.:

F. H. Ainsworth, Assistant Chief Engineer, Salisbury, Md.

C. F. Bateman, Chief Engineer, Salisbury, Md.

W. L. Connelly, Jr., Sales Engineer, Salisbury, Md.

W. J. Dubsky, Project Engineer, Salisbury, Md.

Wood, John, Co.: Louis G. Close, Manager, Baltimore District, Bennett Pump Division, 2127 North Charles Street, Baltimore 18, Md.

William M. Hoxie, Service Manager, Bennett Pump Division, Broadway

and Lethen, Muskegon, Mich.

GUESTS REPRESENTING ASSOCIATIONS, BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY,

AND RAILROADS

American Meat Institute: Arthur Broadwin, 727 National Press Building,

Washington 4, D. C. 113
American Petroleum Institute: Logan L. Kennedy, Chairman, Committee on Weights and Measures,

(Esso Standard Oil Company) , 500 IN orth Broad Street, Elizabeth 3, N. J. R. H. Stewart, Administrative Assistant to President, 50 West 50th Street, New York 20, N. Y. American Rose Society: J. Preston Swecker, 938 Washington Building, Washington 5, D. C. American Safety Razor Co.: R. O. Rask, Metrologist, Central Scale Repair Unit

(Kingsbury Ordnance Plant), Walkerton, Indiana. American Seed Trade Association: William Heckendorn, Executive Secretary, Suite 1107, 30 North La Salle Street, Chicago 2, 111. American Trucking Association: Lewis C. Kibbee, Chief, Equipment and Operations Section, 1424 Sixteenth Street, N. W., Washington 6, D. C. Association of American Soap and Glycerine Producers, Inc.:

J. M. Miller, 295 Madison Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. Roy W. Peet, Manager, 295 Madison Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. Atkins & Durbrow Sales Ltd.: J. T. Bell, 525 Seymour Street, Vancouver 2, British Columbia, Canada.

Atlantic Peat Moss Co., Ltd.: Emilien Langevin, General Manager, 2005

McGill College, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

Atlantic Refining Co.: John R. Fairweather, Operations Department, Philadelphia, Pa. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Co.: E. Kent Lawrence, General Scale Inspector,

Maintenance of Way Department, Baltimore 1, Md.

Borden's Farm Products: W. R. Baulkwill, Supervisor, Country Plants, 110 Hudson Street, New York 13, N. Y. Connecticut Milk Producers Association: John S. Seremet, Supervisor, Field

Service, 990 Wethersfeld Avenue, Hartford, Conn. Cordage Institute: DeWitt C. Schieck, Secretary, 350 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y. Raymond M. Tierney, Lawyer, 350 Madison Avenue, New York, N. Y. Dairy Industries Supply Association: W. Harold Hayes, 1108 Sixteenth Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. Dairymen's League Co-Operative Association: Robert W. Metzger, Assistant Director of Quality Control, 100 Park Avenue, New York, N. Y. Food Field Reporter: Kermit K. Brown, 1232 National Press Building, Washington, D. C. Fruit Dispatch Co.: John N. Kelly, Equipment Department, Pier 7, North River, New York 6, N. Y.

R. B. Tewksbury, Assistant Manager, Fruit Transportation, Pier 7, North

River, New York 6, N. Y.

Gasoline Pump Manufacturers Association: G. Denny Moore, Managing Director, Graybar Building, 420 Lexington Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. General Ice Cream Corporation: G. Emerson Sartain, Producer Relations,

Bryant and Chapman Dairy, 255 Homestead Avenue, Hartford, Conn.

General Mills, Inc.: Oswald A. Oudal, Products Control Manager, Grocery

Products Division, 400 Second Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minn.

Glass Container Manufacturers Institute: C. E. Wagner, Development Engineer, 8 West Fortieth Street, New York 18, N. Y. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.: W. P. Reed, Manager, Weights and Measures Department, 3230 Peachtree Road, N. E., Atlanta, Ga.

Gulf Oil Corporation:

E. C. Dickey, Superintendent, Marketing Equipment, Atlanta Division, Gulf Building, Atlanta 1, Ga. John O. Habicht, Superintendent, Marketing Equipment, 1515 Locust

Street, Philadelphia 2, Pa. W. K. McCoy, General Superintendent, Marketing Equipment, Gulf Building, Pittsburgh 30, Pa. Indiana Motor Truck Association, Inc.: James E. Nicholas, General Manager,

701 Roosevelt Building, 9 North Illinois Street, Indianapolis 4, Ind.

Industrial Research Syndicate: C. A. Lindsay, Director, 1305 Euclid Street,

; N. W., Washington 9, D. C. International Association of Ice Cream Manufacturers:

Robert C. Hibben, Executive Secretary, 1105 Barr Building, Washington

6, D. C. Robert H. North, Executive Assistant, 1105 Barr Building, Washington, D. C. Donald H. Williams, Assistant to Executive Secretary, 1105 Barr Building,

Washington, D. C. 114
International Milling Company: John T. Lynch, General Sales Manager, 800 McKnight Building, Minneapolis, Minn.

Liquid-Tight Paper Container Association: Arthur W. Howe, Jr., Assistant Executive Secretary, 1532 Lincoln-Liberty Building, Philadelphia 7, Pa.

Lorillard, P., Co.: Herbert R. O'Conor, Jr., 10 Light Street, Baltimore 2, Md.

Maryland Coop. Milk Producers, Inc.: F. G. Morgan, Field Man, 2210 North Charles Street, Baltimore, Md.

Oscar D. Turner, Field Representative, 2210 North Charles Street, Balti- more 18, Md.

Mathieson Chemical Corporation: Eric R. Woodward, Chemical Engineer,

Mathieson Building, Baltimore 3, Md.

Milk Industry Foundation: Ernest B. Kellogg, Secretary, 1625 Eve Street, N. W., Washington 6, D. C.

Millers National Federation: Herman Fakler, Vice President, 847 Nationa

Press Building, Washington, D. C. Missouri-Pacific Railroad: C. W. Laird, Superintendent of Scales, 204 Union

Station, Houston 1, Texas. National Association of Dairv Equipment Manufacturers: John Marshall,

Executive Secretary, 927 Fifteenth Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. National Association of Scale Manufacturers, Inc.: Arthur Sanders, Executive

Secretary, One Thomas Circle, Washington 5, D. C. National Fisheries Institute: Charles E. Jackson, General Manager, 1614 Twentieth Street, N. W., Washington 9, D. C. National Paper Trade Association, Inc.: J. E. Goodridge, Secretary, Wrapping

Paper Division, 220 East 42nd Street, New York 17, N. Y. Paper Cup and Container Institute, Inc.: Dale H. Eckerman, Executive Director, Room 1020, 250 Park Avenue,

New York 17, N. Y. Robert W. Foster, Assistant to Executive Director, Room 1020, 250 Park

Avenue, New York 17, N. Y. Pennsylvania Railroad

:

Byron R. Nelson, Supervisor of Scale Inspectors, Room 417, 30th Street

Station, Philadelphia 4, Pa. Millard A. Pinney, Engineer of Tests, Test Department, Altoona, Pa.

Pillsbury Mills, Inc.: O. W. Galloway, Claim Agent, 608 Pillsbury Building, Minneapolis 2, Minn.

Charles E. Joyce, Assistant Claim Agent, 608 Pillsbury Building, Minneapolis, Minn.

Premier Peat Moss Corporation:

M. T. Graham, Vice President, 535 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. Ernst Mayer, 535 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. Safeway Stores, Inc.: Luther S. Beale, Employee Relations Manager, 1845 Fourth Street, N. E., Washington, D. C. Frank J. Sheehan, Manager, Public Relations, 726 Jackson Place, N. W

T

., Washington 6, D. C. Joseph W. Upton, Price Maker, 1845 Fourth Street, N. E., Washington, D. C. Burt R. Warner, Advertising Manager, 1845 Fourth Street, N. E., Washington, D. C. Gibson I. Wright, Supplv Manager, 1845 Fourth Street, N. E., Washington, D. C. Saybolt, J. W., Business Counsellor on Weights and Measures Laws, 9209

Carlyle Avenue, Surfside, Miami Beach 41, Fla. Scale Journal Publishing Co.: Mrs. Edith J. Saybolt, 176 West Adams Street, Chicago 3, 111. Shell Oil Co.: Leonard E. Noud, Engineer, 37-06 82nd Street, Jackson Heights, N. Y.

Sinclair Refining Co.: Kenneth W. Birkin, Manager, Automotive Department,

600 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. Soconv-Vacuum Oil Co.: M. M. Buckas, Operating Manager, 26 Broadwav, New

York 4, N. Y. Southern Railway System: J. N. Todd, Superintendent of Scales and Work

Equipment, Office of Chief Engineer, Washington 13, D. C. Standard Oil Co.: Harry F. Utzerath, General Field Engineer, 910 South

Michigan Avenue, Room 1335, Chicago, 111. Texas Co.: R. H. Tolson, Assistant Manager, Sales Department, Construction

and Equipment Division, 135 East Forty-second Street, New York 17, N. Y. Texas and New Orleans Railroad Company: R. A. Hostetter, Supervisor, Equipment and Scales, Houston, Texas. 115
Thread Institute, Inc.: James B. Duffy, Chairman of Legislation Committee, 11 West Fortysecond Street, New York 36, N. Y.

J. W. Shaver, Director, 11 West Forty-second Street, New York 36, N. Y. David Snyder, Executive Director, 11 West Forty-second Street, New York

36, N. Y.

Visking Corporation:

Elliot Balestier, Jr., Assistant to President, 6733 West Sixty-fifth Street, Chicago 38, 111. William M. Sawers, 6733 West Sixty-fifth Street, Chicago 38, 111. Western Weighing and Inspection Bureau: E. M. Curl, Supervisor of Weights,

Room 460, Union Station, 517 West Adams Street, Chicago 6, 111. OTHER GUESTS

Aimone Camardella, Section Chief & Technical Engineer, Institute of National

Technology, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Jack S. Conrad, Assistant Inspector, Dairy Inspection Service, Dairy Department, College of Agriculture, University of Maryland, College Park, Md.

Matthew A. Donohue, Room 6, Hall of Records, Center & Chambers Streets, New York, N. Y. Amos R. Meyer, Associate Professor, 247 Symons Hall, University of Maryland,

College Park, Md.

Harold A. Newlander, Dairy Inspection Service, Dairy Department, University

of Maryland, College Park, Md.

116 U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1953