|
Discussion |
Ground Engineering Division, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne
I would like to thank Mr Gerrard for his interest in the Technical Note, ‘An observation on Mohs' Scale of Hardness’, and his discussion of it. He is also thanked for the reference to the work of Young & Millman (reported by Duncan 1969) on the same topic. Mr Gerrard is undoubtedly correct in supposing that much of the variation in the abrasiveness test results for individual minerals shown in fig. 2 of the paper is due to anistropy of the specimens, probably arising from all the factors he mentions together with small variations in composition of the mineral.
Professor D. M. Cruden of the University of Alberta (pers. comm. 1986) is also thanked for drawing attention to the work of Tabor (1954) who showed that each standard mineral on Mohs' scale is approximately 60% harder than the preceding one, and that Mohs may have tried to obtain ‘equality of the intervals’ when he selected the minerals for his scale.
...
This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.
Related articles in Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology:
