# Transcript of Record — Universal Oil Products Co. v. Globe Oil & Refining Co > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386404_0029%3A03 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Transcript of Record - **Published:** January 1, 1944 - **Citation:** 322 U.S. 471 ## Text Aine Vol. Ill TRANSCRIPT OF RECORD - , (Pages 1023 to 1504) . \- = _ Supreme Court of the United States _ OCTOBER TERM, 1943 a No. 392 pgaavaedanun . 816 SG, EN Whe cbs ccssccncuccccces eS Holmes, Ralph €...............20000: wiedesssse ae _ Hooker, Forney G..............-. prsbvacKens .. 809 Mackenzie, Kenneth G..... ses seessbbnees is ead 1023 McCarthy, John S............ Gieeiedil seed ee . 1054 Reiman, Dr. Clarence K......... scl saawaa «... 4174 Schneider, Ben R............. éuukas awe Coa 1049 Smith, Harris A.:.............. ex cea Cap déssn ee ne ee SPELT EE ETP OLEe El cP cca pee ce Agreed Statement as fo Introdyction of Exhibits. TOT. 1505 vol Ey. vo. 108 bled ta Tap 1998 to 2468) Wel. VE, pp. te soee: v + PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBITS. a “ versal against users of #73 a-k Winkler-Koch stills, who 14 4-4) contributed to defense fund 5 1995 (175—Excerpts from. Texas Company employee efficiency record for Be- ’ ; ME 5 cs need unas i cpnacnasee oaks 1 183 .5 1997 176—Excerpts from certified-copy of ™ File Wrapper éf Behimer Appl. | 263,562, , Patent 2,027,014 ..... ey 1 183 5 2001 | 17 7—Excerpts from certified copy of -File Wrapper of Behimer teh : 1,883,850 (Appl. 630,242) _ veer ree 1 _ 184 5 2008 178—Excerpts from certified copy o ee ' . File Wrapper of Interference No. ee -: 49,355 entitled ‘‘Dubbs v. Holmes, os; Manley and Behimer’’ ............ 1 184 5 2052.: 179—Excerpts from. certified copy of ~ . File Wrapper of Interference No. ea 55,610 ipkaus anak decide aseshiiass 1 184 5 2118 180—Behimer’ s letter of Reciguation to Texas Co., Aug. 24, 1927 ...... ee cor 181—Letter, Holmes to Behimer, ee 27, W927. ence eee eee eee eee e ee ees . - 182—Letter Behimer to Holmes, Sept. — 30, 1927 and check EPEC CEO e TT ee 1 188 183—Letter, Dearborn to Sidlinas, as \ oe + aeass SEP rer Pere rr 1 188 184—Letter, Dearborn to mee, Oct. a Ss 17, 1927 0s. ccc ce cern ceceessseeces 1 190 184A—Copy of ” Behimer’ 8 Cuatead a with Texas Co., dated December 15, OOD ckcpdugwancausercéua yanks es 1 191. 185—Letter, C. M. Thomas to. ‘Deae- . ae . ‘born, Ost. 22, 1927 ........ aes a: 1 192 186—Letter, Dearborn to Thomas, Oct. : - Oct. 24, 1927 pre errr erry Dae Free 1 193 187—Lefter Bebimer to Dearborn, Nov. . 5, 1927 ese seegdeecceaes pies ciaaes 1 194 Fabre VoL 1, pp. 1.to.550; Vol. IZ, pp. 551 to 1022; Vol. oa aaab Oo 3088: Vol. IV, pp. 1806 to 1993; Vol. ¥, pp. 1995 to 2493; Vol. 2495 to 3084; Vol. ‘VEE, pp. 3085 to 3867. va AEG en tad _ Repreduced ae peed in tn Beak of 188—Letter, Thomas to Dearborn, Nov. , 11, 1927 oars cccceneeeseceereceees 1 196 189—Telegram, deastais to Thomas, 12, 1987 02. cccscsccvccccccsccccese 1 197° io Sista Thomas to Dearborn, Nov. 16, 1927 2... . es eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees 1 197 191—Letter, Dearborn to Behimer, Nov. 25, 192T oo se ceeeercceececceseeeere D 197 . 192—Letter, Dearborn to Behimer, Dec. eS eeerrerrrrrr reer ekae a 1 198 193—Letter, Dearborn to Thomas, Dee. 14, 1927 ...... iaeidiethatacesstes at 66199 194—Letter, Mace to, Thomas, Dec. 22, . | oor 1 199 194A-—Dearborn Affidav it attached te DX 194 0... e cee ce rece eee e cence 1 200 195—Letter, Thomas t to Mace, Dee. 27, - et a dian dd tess ese 1 “202 196—Letter, ‘Behimer to Dearborn, Mar. . i see Por te 1 203 197—Proposed Aniended Preliminary Statement of Otto Behimer, attached ‘to DX 196 0.2... ccc e cece eee ee eee 1 206 - 202—Letter- of Sept. 7, 1926, Beyt toi 218 Wannack. Cheek attached to letter .. 1 218 5 2163 203—G. D. White affidavit dated Aug. "31, 1926, with letter and env oe at- ; Ns isc ci vanes odsau ruses beak 1° 219 -5 2165 _ -304—Affidavits of Dellinger, Belfimer, White and Beyt .. 2249 ° 217—Affidavit prepared for Maurice Beyt, unsigned .......... tte e eee e es 1. . 162 218—Affidavit \ prepared for. Maurice Bagh, Wee oon odes ac cess dgec Vs. 1 162 219—Affidavit prepared - for Maadles Beyt, unsigned ?.)...... ee oP Ps ‘1 162. 5 2255. 220—Abstract of Bill of Complaint and Answer, and Amendment to Answer | in Universal Oil Products. Co. v. ; Dickey Refg. Co. (Equity No. 822-N) 1 229 5 2260 221—Letter, Nov. 30, 1926, Fantz to” o g MEE 3csocatceeucicdadsaeaccass 1 268 222—Letter, Nov. 30, 1926, Fantz to | EE ccd dn dedsananhdeeed caeku 1, 268 293—Telegram, Dec. 7, 1925, ey ‘to Bs SE an deckcddavwaisekaenets 1 269 '224—-Telegram, July 17, 1927, ¢. P.* Dubbs to Robert J. Dunham........ 1 269 225—Telegram, July 17, 1927, C. P. - Dubbs to Robert J. Dunham........ 1 270 ~ VoL Z, pp. 1 to 850; Wol. 3%, pp. 681 to 1089; Wol IIL pp.l0ea to 1503: Vol. TV. pp. 1808 to 1983; Vol. V, pp. 1995 to 2483; Vol. b cgaion 3084; Vol. VIX, pp. 3085 to 3567. Vi, pp. xix - 226—Telegram, July 18, 1927, R. J. ‘ ‘Dunham to C. P. Dubbs..:......... 1 270 227—Offfice Record Copy of Telegram, July 18, 1927, R. G. Danielson to L. ‘H. ‘Thompson peonnedashbicseapesee 1. 271 228—Telegram, July 20, 1927, C. P.- Dubbs to R. J. Dunham........... 1° 271 229—Telegram, July 21, 1927, Reich- - imemn to-C. P. Debbs............... 1 272 ; 230-—Telegram, July 22, 1927, A. F. Reichmann to C. P. Dubbs....... in 231—Photostat of contract between ' Universal Oil Products Company and * Otto Behimer, dated Aug. 20, 1927.. 1 272 * 232—Agreement between Otto Behimer and Universal Oil Products Co., dated Nov. 16, 1927..............¢. 1 274 233—Letter, Nov. 16, 1927, R. J. Dun- | ham to Otto Behimer........... aha 2 234— Wannack Expense meniorgnda : _ (51 pages) for 1925 and 1926..... j. -". 5h 3 235—Wannack Expense - item dated ; Aug. 7, WDM... cesses cdecscecceae’ oo 5 . 2337 ~ 236A—Letter, way 3, 1925, Dubbs to ; mee | DE cha ductbistieekahsnkenssae 5, 2389 . 236B—Letter, ‘July A 1925, Dubbs to leg ae Re ae an te ‘5 -2339 236C—Telegram, July 9, 1925, Dubbs Oe MEE .c.bbc due deobecevecsea ses ee ad 2340 wal Eye PP abode atest Vol. . B51 to 1022; Vol. DP. 1023 to 1503; —_— DD. 1995 to 2493; Vol. : PP. 2495 to 3084; Oe tele lin tn Bok of | . Va Pese | Veh 237—Beyt’ s Contract with Universal Oil Products Co., dated Sept. 28, 1927 * ~§ 2341 238—Telegram, Oct. 1, 1927, Bia to. me W. K. Holmes...... Chien Gana Caen ss 1 364 r 239—A pparatus for Reconstructed Ex- » periment 8 operated Aug. 1926 (Page. ‘92 of Behimer’s affidavit).....:..... 5 2343 240—Apparatus for Experiment 8, op- erated May to Aug. 1917 (Page 43B of Behimer Affidavit) were beeen ene 5 2345 241 for ident.—Letter, Aug. 21, 1918, — . Dubbs to R. C. Holmes...... paecias 5 2347 242-245—Abstract of Pleadings in suits of Universal v. Texas Company. and — Universal v. Standard Oil Company ; (Ind.) in 1926 and 1927............ 1 414 5 2355 246—Telegrams (15) from “Cal” to M: Egeler and telegram from’C. : Smith to Dubbs, Feb. to Sept. 1926... 1 431 5 2356 247—Telegram, Aug. 3, 1925, Wannack : to Egeler; Telegram, Nov. 17, 1925, -Wannack to Egeler; Telegram, Jan. 18, 1926, ‘‘W’’ to -Egeler; Letter, Aug. 3,. 1926, Wannack to Egeler; Note, Oct. 16, -1926, “Cal? to ‘“‘Dear ' Sir’? 2... Rey ge re Pe ee ee ; 5 2360 "3S RS PS a "4. 435 249—Letters. and telegrams between Dubbs and Wannack, June, 1925 to r; Nov. MMU dautascnhiesi cid hekee oe ‘ 5 WoL & pp.1 to 880; Vol. Pp. 551 to 1082; Vol. DP. 1083 to Vol. FV, pp. 1606 to 1993; Wol. V pp. 1998 to 9483, Vol. Vi, pp. S408 te Vol. VIX, pp. 3088 to 3867, nual ; ” in Book of 307—Settlement agreement as of Apr. 1, 1939 (typewritten) between Uni- _ versal and Root Petroleum Co....... 5 2376 308—Supplemental letter, Jan. 25, — 1939, sjgned by Universal and Root Petroleum Co. modifying acto 2 of DX 307......... ccc eeeeeuss 5 2381 311—Letter, - Jan. 26, 1939, Root ; Petroleum Co. to Thiess............ 5, 2383 525—Pyzel patent 1,597,821............ 7 3436 526—Jesse A. Duhbs patent 1,123,502... — 7 3174 527—Trumble patent‘ 1,281,884....... 7 3286 528—Pyzel patent 1,506,444.......... _ 7 3424 529—Pyzel patent 1,891,218.......... 7 3506 530—Pyzel patent 1,622,737....:..... / 7 344d 554—Hanna patent 1 449,226 bons Sie 7. 3394 555—Hanna patent 1,449,227.......... 7 } 556—Drawings of Richmond (Hanna) Pressure Still ...... ce Madaaten bees -2 _ 568 557—Drawing of Halloran and Strout Still, dated Aug. 30, 1923............ 570 558—Drawing of Halloran. and Strout Still, dated Jan. 22, 1924............ 2 570 559—Flow sheet of proposed modified Richmond (Halloran and Strout) cracking process, dated March 18, _ 1924 PeeeOeeeeseseeeeseeesceegeses 5#1—Hanna patent 1,655,603...... Sor a TET Syren hares 2 578 .5 2385 3462 xxii Described or § Reproduced in in Book of estimony Exhibits 2 562—Standard Oil Co. frewing. B-21601 (Dubbs furnace) ................4. 2 592 563—Standard Oil Co. Drawing A- 21589 a eee TROIS iss akc sc ieccabnces 2 592 564—Record sheets for Run No. 16, : , PUNO TOMS 2. nce ee sececces ink anes 2.. 592 565—Record sheets eid Run No. 41, Se PROT re Tee eT tre ree 2 593 588—Defendant’s request for admis- sion of genuineness of documents... 5 . 2387. 589-—Plaintiff’s answer to request for - admission of — genuineness of docu- ee CE cus cei bas wie ce ev eC ucuR ees ' 3 2392 590—Abstract of Booklet by U.O.P— | 1924-25 ...... SON LON Ee 2 625 5 2393 591—Abstract of Booklet by U. O. P.— 3 WN os ica et cece ee ee towiaeee 2 625 > 35 592—Abstract of, Booklet by U. O. P. “= Mr as 2 625 5 2401 3450 3512 3520 ) 505-—-Hiath Patent sero. Pavicres 596—Huff Patent: 2,039,797.......... 599—Patent application A (Homes, Manley & Behimer),. delivered to . Nesbitt by Mackenzie to be forwarded Oe Se ao ce ce oes oe eee 3 1023 600—Excerpt from letter, Mackenzie to _ ‘Nesbitt, March 22, 1918............. . 3. 1023 601—Telegram, Mackenzie to Holmes, | MN ye DUNS ik ic kcccasieesas a ae ae >) RE i mS = y —_ > ee — hog 2 NN w on Nyanga - 2403 qv Vol. I, pp. 1 to 550;-Vol. 1%, pp. 551 to 1082; Vol. IIZ, pp. 1023 to 1503; Vol. IV. pp. 1605 to 1993; Vol. V, pp. 1995 to 2493; Vol. Wi, pp..2495 to 3084; Vel. VIz, pp. 3085 to 3567. 2 xxiii 602—Excerpt from letter, Mackenzie | to Holmes, Apr. 27, 1918..........; 3 1027 603—-Excerpt from letter, Mackenzie to Nesbitt, May 3, 1918............... 3 1028 2 604—Letter, Nesbitt to Foster, Free- ) man, Watson and Coit, May 4,1918:. 3 1028 5 2414 605—Letter, Coit to ) Meats, May 6, WE cede mae xs 31028 5 2414 606—Letter, Mackenzie to Coit, ‘May 9, _* . EE catia Soa raeeknnn un ei ved nes seks: 3 1028 607—Letter, Coit to Mackenzie, May EE oI 4.4 065 S4k 04d chee etwas 3 1028 608—Letter, Mackenzie to Holmes, May 31, 1918 ...... appar oe Torerer? 2 979 a. 3 1028 609—Excerpt from letter, Coit to Nes- : Dect, Sume S,.191B 2:65. gece ce cesccys 3 1029. : 610—Excerpts from letter, Nesbitt to - Coit, June 13, 1918 (Mackenzic’ s 3 SPR Rar ee an iran SRM AEN 3 1029 611—Letter, Coit to Nesbitt, June 15, I es i ee 3 1030 o 612—Letter, Nesbit to Holmes, July - 23, 1918, and attached copy of letter from Coit to Nesbitt, dated July 22; ¢ | PRE ee op eeaekaaeaees 3 1031 613—Letter, Mackenzie to Holmes, Aug. - . 97, 1918 ..... ne Nes 3 1031 614—Excerpts from letter, Mackenzie to Holmes, Sept..9, 1918............ 3 1033 Vol x, pp. 1 to B50; Vol. IZ, pp. 551 to 1022; Vol. IIT, pp. 1023 to 1503; Vol. IV, pp. 1505 to 1993; Vol. V, pp. 1995 to 2493; Vol. VI, pp. 2495 to 3084; Vol. VII, pp. 3085 to 3567. XXiv 615—Letter, Thomas to Mackenzie, _ - Sept. 13, 1918, enclosing letter from Coit, dated Sept. 11, 1918.......... 3 1033 - 616—Letter, “Mackenzie to Thomas, Sept: 94,-1998 io... tececseceess. 3 1034 617—Letter,, Mackenzie to ‘Selats, oe peer Pere 3 1034 618—Letter, Mackeasie to Van ae, SA Ska dtd ab cesacanbannas 3 - 1035 619—Letter, Van Gundy to Mackenzie, ; Oct. 31, 1918 ...... See at RoE ie 3 1035 620—Letter, Behimer ” to “Mackenzie. i? . ) _ Oct. PO 0 As Ch Weennods i ceeenns 2° 915 : 3 1035 621—Letter, Mackensie . to Holmes, Nov. ee RUE Siewetneuiecisirccencs 3 1036, 622—Letter, Mackenzie to Thomas, ince rere vecks ‘... 3 1036 623A—Flouw diagram by De Florez, of . operation at Bayonne (Hall Process) 2 847 626—Excerpt- from: report, Mackenzie ' to Holmes, Feb. 28, 1917, Runs 12 to - 24 | Ba ee 2° 853 627—Report, Mackenzie to Holmes, _ April 12, 1917, Runs 25, 26, 32‘and 33 4 1044 628—Excerpts from final report on Hall Process, May 9, 1917...... exe S 1039 629—Excerpt from report on Hall Proc- ess; Mackenzie to Holmes, May 7, or. - 2415 9417 2419 2422 ot rere rere Missal scaees ans san *. 3. 1045 "Vol. %; pp. 1 to 880; Vol. IT, pp. 551 to 1082; Wol. IZ, pp. 1083 to 1503: Vol. IV, pp. 1505 to 1993: Vol. Wi bp. 189" to 2483: Vol. Vi, pp. 9496 Yo 3004; 630—Excerpt from report on Hall Proc- ess; Mackenzie to Manley, May 29, errr errr TeTer ree rrr erry 3 1040 632—Excerpt from report, Mackenzie to Holmes, Oct. 17, 1917, Summary of ‘Runs 101 to 109 on Hall Process.... 3 1040 '634—Report, Mackenzie to. Shien , Oct. 26, 1917, on Hall Process .......3 1042 5 2436 - 635—Reporf, Mackenzie to Holmes,: Jan. 17, 1918, Summary of October, " November and December operations at Bayonne on Hall Process. ....... 3 1042. 5 2444 641—Cady drawing of apparatus to : demonstrate vayor pressure ....... 2, 792 5 2449 .642—Cady curve of vapor presente of 7 EE atic d dub aeekGhbscekesceeawnks 2° 793 5 2451 644—Cady photograph of elie of 0 RT ee ere 2 -796 5 2453 645—-Cady photograph of column after os boiling DU IEE nau ess couch an 2 797 5 2453 646—Cady diagram of apparatus used - to measure vapor pressure of mixed | liquid solutions ...:.......... Se a: one 647—Cady diagram of epperedeis show- ing the partial pressure effect in _ fractionation of a solution ........ . 2 .802 5 2457 648—Excerpt from Science of Common - ; Things, p. 194, by Wells (1863)..... 2 804° 5 2459 649—Excérpt from Physics for. College | Student, p. 375, by Carhart (1910).. 2 804 5 2459 Vol I, pp. 1 to 550; Vol. IZ, pp "681 to 1022; Vol. PR 1027 to 1503; Vol. IV, pp. 1505 to 1993; Vol. v vp. 1995 to 2493; Vol. PP. 2495 to 3084; Vol. VII, pp. 3085 to 3567. ; Tin in Beok of estimeny | Exhibits Vol. Page Vel. Page 650—Excerpt from A Text Book of Physics, p. 196, by Spinney (1925).. 2 804 5 2459 -651—Excerpt from Physics, Advanced oe Course, by Barker, p. 309 (1892).... 2 805 5 2460 ' 652—Excerpt from Elementary Trea- tise on Physics, p. 341, .Atkinson’s _ | Translation of Ganot (1879) ....... 2 805 -5 2460 653—Excerpt froni Essentjals of Phys- ics for College Students, p. 115, by - _. Bee CHES) 2... sss POT eee 5 2461. 654— Excerpt from College Physics, | p. 240, by Reed and Guthe (1912).. 5 2461 655—Excerpt from The Elements a Physics, p. 192, by Coleman (1906).. 5 2461 _ 656—Excerpt from The Elements of ake Physics, p. 148, by Carhart & Chute se : SE Std te ceva wer ede ks teks axa ks 5 2461 657—Excerpts from Physics for Stu- dents of Applied Science, pp. 198 and . _ 202, by Shrader (1937) ...:...... 5 2462 658—Excerpt from. A Textbook of. In- organic Chemistry for Colleges, - 163, by Norris (1921) .........) | 2477 6 279.° ° 5 2483 5 2485 5 * 2487 5 * 2489 5 2491 .5. 2493 Vol. Z, pp. 1 to 550; Vol. IZ, pp. 651 to 1022; Vol. PP. 1023 to 1503; Vol. IV, pp. 1505 ee 7 Vol. V, pp. 1995 to 2493; Vol. PP. 2495 to 3084; . Vol. VII, yp. fia in Book of ‘estimony Exhibits 675—Behimer’s fractioning equipment ae be (Sketch Perr Se Perret 2 892:. 6 . 2495 675A—Behimer’ s condenser for ftac- ; . tionators (Sketch #9)...... adae (2 892 6 2497 676—Records of Run 6, Experiment 8 (coil and drum) ..........-seees. ‘a ‘677—Records of Run 7, Experiment 8 op” | RApeea pee) saree 2. 678—-Records of Run 8, Experimental 8 (coil and drum) piace cekueevene kas 2 679—Records of Run 9, Experimental Ss . (coil and SED BED cw crcccccccececccsescuceseee ‘3 1134 6 211 777—Sketch of Jenkins still, prepared . | > AA Speers 3 1139 6 2813 778—Drawing of coil distillation ap- - ° | paratus, prepared by Reiman...... 3.1179 «6 215 779—Atwood Patent 28,448.......... 7 3110 780-—Simplified drawing of Atwood | Patent, prepared by Reiman....... 3 1184 6 2R17 781—Merrill Reissue patent 7,096. ... 7 3105 ‘782—Dewar and Redwood ~ patent : GID TRE “an ccrgcccccccccegeccccgeces : 7 3122 783—Burton patent 1 105,961 casecase . 7 3164 — vat. Bebe eae ee ee tees a "7s, 7, 1 poet: Reprodeced in tn Beak of ) Va Pas | Vel Page 784—-Humphreys patent 1,119,700.... : 7 3170 .785—Edwards, patent 1,170,884....... 7 3182 786—Smith patent 1,239,423......... 7 3224 787—Benton (Br.) patent 1,922 of 1887 7 3527 ; ~~, 188—Pielsticker (Br.) patent 6,466 of : ane 1890 PC eee Tee Fe eer kt Chere ’ 7 3545 789—PYelsticker (Br, patent 1,706 _ ree | i re reer ee ie wren ' % 3539 790—Pielsticker (Br) eee 1,308 of erty Se. “scree paws nn aehks Mae desea : 7 3531 #91:-Sivaplified pe of Piclsticker . eas, ‘patent, prepared by Reiman ....... 3 1210. 6 2819 _ 792—Pielsticker patent 477,153....... ' 7 3126 793—Yall patent 1,175,910........... 7 3200 *. 794—Letter,- Kinzer: to Dawson, Sept. a | 21, WONT «6... eee eee eet e ee eee 2 1015- 6, 2821 795—Letter,. Daw son - Bailey, Sept. i EE whan cdaednd ses as ceuewies 2 1015. 6 2821 796A—Letter, Kinzer to Dawson, Oct. . | ae ee. rae eh Peewee Er ere 2 1016 6 2822 -796B—Drawing U-2912, enclosed in. | 796A, of high: pressure: still drum, = "+ * - Experiment 12, dated. Sept. 5, 1917..-2 1018 6. 2823. 797—Drawing P-227, dated. June 5,° ©. | 1919, showing plan of a commercial battery without pump and clean cir-_ . i -dulation ©...... cht axes eames vvuecsS 2007 6 9035. 798—-Drawing. P-230, dated: dais . @ - 1919, showing. longitydinal section of : same stillg".:......... Vs niedonacis 2 1017 6 2827 Vol. I, pp. 1 to 550; Yol. PP. 551 to 1 . Yel. EV, Dy. 1808 So 1980; Vol. + PP 1996 to Vol. VII, pp. 3085 to 3567. oa2; 1082 to 1503; aeday wel. Bp. 1082 vo 1503: Described or in in Book of Vel. | Page Vol. Page 799_Drawing P. 238 showing preheater, . ee: ¢ dated June &, -1919........cccceecs- 2.1017 6 2829 800—Drawing Y-4578, dated May 21, , 1921, showing piping for float gauge and Surge pump for back trap, Bat- | We S60 3h asiss bcixe wee aes saae ba 2 1018 6 2831 801—Biddison & Boyd Patent 1,345,740 « _ 7 3336 802 and 802A—Excerpts from certified copy of File Wrapper of Biddison _ & Boyd Patent 1,345,740 and original | ee Serre rrr rrr ree . 6 2833 803—Simplified drawing of Biddison & ; Boyd patent prepared by Reiman... 3 1231 6 2863 -804—Ellis patent 1,396,999.......... nai 7 3352 P 805—Simplified drawing of Tremble 7 ; _ patent 1,281,884, preparedby Reiman 3 1250 6 2865 . 806—Alexander patent ‘1,407,619... 7 3364 807—Excerpts ‘from certified copy of . a maar 7 Alexander patent File Wrapper..... : °6 2867 - 808—Alexander patent, simplified draw- - | "ing prepared by er eee 3 1256 6 2897 - 809—Greenstreet patent 1,740,601... . 18476 810—Excerpts from certified copy of : - File Wrapper of Greenstreet i e my A Peper) Teer Pere er Tre ore 3 1283 6 2899 811—Enlarged drawing of Greenstreet patent with colored lines, piunire dy Ee ae eee 3 1265 6 2953, 812—Simplified drawing of Gramestvent } zs . patent, prepared by Reiman... eee 3.1270 6 .2959 - . ‘Wol. Z, pp. 1 to $50; Vol. 22, pp. 551 to 1082; Vol, 1023 to 1503; Vol. IV, pp. 1505 to 1993; Vol. V. pp. 1995 to 9403, Vol. Vi, pp. 2405 to 3084; ee . 3088 to 3867. : Vol. IV, pp. 1505 to 1993; Vol. V, pp. 1995 to 2493; V Vol. WIZ, pp. 3085 to 3567. * fin im Book of | Vol. Page Vol. Page .813—Prior Art Patents in File Wrap- per of Dubbs, 1,392,629, except those shown as separate exhibits: . 7 Hall patent No. 1,175,909......... 7 3194 Zerning patent No. 1,183,266: ..... 7 3208 © Lambert patent No. 1,245,930..... 7 3238 Ellis patent No. 1,249,278......... 7 3248 ' Coast patent No. 1,250,799........ a 7. 3262 814—Prior Art Patents in File Wrap- . per of Egloff, 1,537,593, except those Fy shown as separate exhibits : Perkins patent No. 399,073....... 7, 3116 Lang patent No: 954,575.......... 7 3140 Gillons patent No. 1,084,080.°.... 7 3154 Forward patent No. 1,202 823 Caie's 6 7 8218 Curran patent No. 1,255,714...... 7 3268 815—Dubbs patent 1,686,654.......... 7 3468 - 816 for ident.—Excerpts from certified copy of File Wrapper of Dubbs - i RRR firey rere 3 1345 6, 2961 817—U. O. P. Bulletin B536, dated Jan Dh SE WWbs XA VR La sdedear sees ,6 2977 _ 818A-O—Summaries of Run sheets for . Dubbs ‘cracking. units.............. 6 2978 819—Exeer)ts from U. O. P. Bulletin (1936) entitled ‘‘Cracking, Yester- | | day, Today’ and ‘Tomorrow’’........ . — 6 2993 | 820—Excerpts from U. 0. P. ‘Bulletin’ . SR-508, June .20, 1932.......... Kies ' 6 2993 821—Excerpts from U. O, P. Bulletin Bi SR-521, June ik. MG ick eeeneaes ‘ 6 2994 “you & opto 000.7 Vol. 1H, pp. 651 v0, 1003; Vol. TH pp . 1083 “3303; ol. Vi, DD. 2495 »’ 822—Hall patent 1,285,136........... §23—Hall patent 1,242,796........... 824—Hali patent 1,194,289........... 825—Excerpts from, ‘Principles of Chemical Engineering’’ by Walker, * Lewis and McAdams....... ery ery 826A—Excerpts from certified copy - of File Wrapper of sntestorenes ‘No. SD siveves Rpcsesunndesedascedss -827A—Excerpts from the Warner- IMIR TICE. oa ccc ceceecccsccee 827 B—Pielsticker drawing from the - Warner-Quinlan Brief ......... eer 828—Excerpts from “Interrogatories and Answer in ©. P. Dubbs v. Uni- versal Oil Products Co............. 831—M echling free hand sketch of nor- mal Alexander operation........... 832—Meehling free hand sketch a . “Regular Operation”’ ........... 833—Mechling free hand sketch 42 “‘Returh of part of condensate from Fractionating Tower .with Fresh Te ude eeeeghedeneé no title ished thee hhd seh aaed& Ee ".. 8224 “No. 1,242,796—W. A. Hall, Oct. 9, 1917..............3230, No. 1,245,930—C. G. Lambert, Nov. 6, 1917....... +». 8238 No. 1,249,278—C. Ellis, Dec. 4, 1917................. 3248 Né. 1,250,050—N. W. Thompson, Dee. 11, 1917.......3254 No. 1,250,799—J. W. Coast, Jr., Dee. 18, | re 3262 No. 1,255,714—J.-J. Curran, Feb. 5, 1918............3268 1,273, 966—F. E. Wellman, July 30, 1918.........3278. No. 1,281,884—M. J. Trumble, Oct. 15, 1918......... 3286 No. 1,285,136—W. A. Hall,. Nov. ‘19, MM 5s ahus cies 3302 - No. 1,288,711—L. O. Sherman, Dec. 24, 1918... erere 3306 No. 1,295,088—A. F. G. P. J. Von Groeling, Feb.. 18, | eee ee ee ee Pera ean aie 3318 Wok & po. 3 to 000; Vol. 32, pp. 551 to 1022; Vol, pp. 1083 to 1008; Vol. IV, pp. 1505 to 1993; Wol. V, Dp. 1995 to 2483: Vol. ¥ ‘DD. 2495 to 3004; Vol. VIZ, pp. 3085 to 3567. . 1,345,740—P. . 1,388,629—J. . 1,396,999—C. 1,407,619—C. . 1,428,338—F. . 1,428,339—F. ; 1 324,983_R. R. : ioaabtonte Dec. 16, 1919....... /.3330 McD. Biddison, et al., July 6, 1920. 3336 W. Coast, Jr., Aug. 23, 1921 Ellis, Nov. 15, 1921 i M. Alexander, Feb..21, 1922.......3364. T. Manley, Sept. 5, 1922 yo Manley, Sept. 5, 1922 . 1,449,226—R. Ww. Hanna, et al., Mar. 20, 1923... .3394 . 1,449,227—R. W. Hanna, et al, Mar. 20, 1923 eee! 3402 . 1,462,143—F. T..Manley, July 17, 1923....... . 3410 . 1,488,325—€. P. Dubbs, Mar. 25, 1924....... cs» S416 . 1,506,444—D. Pyzel, Ang. 26, 1924.............. 3424 . 1,585,496—R. C. Holmes, et al., May 18, 1926... . .3428 . 1,597,821—D. Pyzel, Aug. 31, 1926............ .. 3436 . 1,622,737—D. Pyzel, Mar. 29, 1927.............. 3444 >: 1,638,735—L. C. Huff, Aug. 9, 1927.....2........ 3450 . 1,640,202—F. T. Manley, Aug. 23, 1927.......... 3456 9. 1,655,603--R. W. Hanna, Jan. 10, 1936.......... ', 3462 — . 1,686,654—C. P. "Dubbs, Oct. 9, 1938............. 3468 . 1,740,691—C. J. Greenstreet, Dec. 24, 1929.......3476 - . 1,765,976—R: A. Halloran, et al., June 24, 1930. . .3486 . '1,883,850—O. Behimer, Oct. 18,°1932............3494 fo..1,891,218—D. Pyzel, Dec. 13,-1932............... 3506 . 1,937,959—L. C. Huff, Dec. 5, 1933........... ,. 3512 . 2,039,797—L. C. Huff, May 5, 1936....... eens 3520 . ‘BRITISH PATENTS. No. 1706—Carl M. Pielsticker, 1882........ nica No. 1922—George L. Benton, 1887............... 8527 No. 6466—Carl M. Pielsticker, 1890.................3549 No. 1308—Carl M. Pielsticker, 1891......... ctheakic 3631. + No. 6545—Hugh E. Fenchelle, 1914..... Weked Pee 3551 No. 15.084—Milton J. Trumble, 1916.................3557 Order allowing certiorari Re ole ans 3587 Vol. 1, pp. 1 to 850; a he Vol. pp. 1023. to 1863 = IV, pp. 1806.to 1993; Vol. V, pp. 1995 to 2493; Vol. PP. 2495 to 3004; ” i 3 g : 1238 1239 Testimony of Kenneth G. Mackenzie. . 1023 1511 KENNETH G. MACKENZIE, Westport, Con- ~ necticut : . i Direct Examination bg Mr. Theiss. I am assistant to the vice-president of the Texas Company. I have been with the Texas Company for nearly twenty-nine years. In 1918 I was con- _ sulting chemist with the Texas Company and likewise in charge of its research and control laboratory at ‘Bayonne, New Jersey. I was occupied with the pat- ent matters of the Texas Company. At that time we had no patent attorney and one of my duties, although Lam not a patent attorney, was to see that inventions made by employees were referred to patent counsel employed on the outside. - ean I remember the filing by the Texas Company of ‘an application for patent in the names of Holines, Manley and Behimer, on or about November 27, 1918, ‘serial No. 263562. About March, 1918, this applica- 1240 - 1241 1241 1242 1243 tion was givén to me by Mr. R. C. Holmes, with the’ request that it be referred to some competent patent attorney for such preparation as might be further required and for filing in the United States Patent Office. The, application was immediately , referred to Mr. James L. Nesbitt of the legal staff of the Texas Company, since all patent matters were. in the charge of our legal department. They employed the patent attorneys and gave such approval as inight be necessary for both employment and filing of ap- plications. | : DX 599 is the application which I delivered to Mr. Nesbitt in March, 1918, for forwarding to Mr. John M. Coit of the firm of Foster, Freeman, Watson & Coit in Washington. On the first- page of DX 599 _ in my handwriting appears the word ** Applica- 1512 tion’? with part of the letter ‘‘A.’’. The rest has been punched out. Also in the upper left- hand corner the letters ‘‘O. K.’’ ; DX 600 is a letter under date of March 22, 1918, from myself to Mr. Nesbitt and refers to four cases of which Case A is the application which I have al- 1024 _ Abstract of Testimony on Merits. ready identified, namely Holmes, Manley and Be- chimer. In part, ‘it reads: 1244 ‘It is Mr. Holmes’ desire that these applications © be. submitted at once to some patent attorney for careful inspection ‘and revision. I assume that Coit would be the best man to-handle this matter. I be- lieve that these should be-sent fo him at once with -_ the request that he go over them carefully with a view to broadening, if possible, both the specifications — | and claims, to the greatest possible extent. | ‘* After he has had opportunity to go over these ap- plications I will confer with him in Washington to — discuss the various features with him and establish the prior art. ‘“‘T expect to be in Houston about the Sth of April, | when the matter of these applications will be taken - up. It is Mr. Holmes’ wish that our rights be not en- -dangered in any way, and: if’ postponing the filing of these applications until my return might be dangerous, in Mr. Coit’s opinion, the cases can be filed as soon as ; he gets them in shape.”? 1245. At the time that I received this application A (DX.. 099) I read it and I understood it. The application : in part reads: — ‘Our process embodies a novel circulatory sVs- tem in which a-ring of oil is constantly maintained under varying liquid and vapor phases. The oil to be — treated on entering this ring is subjected to a high degree of heat, but the time element is so controlled that there is comparatively little decomposition while’ it is exposed to this external heat, the oil being rapidly . removed from the heating zone and conducted to the cracking zone, where without being subjected to ad- ditional heat, it undergoes a molecular. decomposi- tion whereby carbon and light products are. formed. The bulk-of the carbon is removed from the ring by Withdrawing from the cracking zone portions of the residual oil. The light products -~coritinne the 1245 1513 cycle, leaving the cracking zone in the form of _ -, vapor and gas. These vapors and gases are then _ subjected to a reduction in temperature, whereby the heavier constituents thereof such as kerosene, are ~“econdensed. The condensate is combined with the ' charge of oil entering the heating zone thus complet- ing the evele. The constituents of the desired vola- T estimony of Kenneth ‘G. Mackenzie. —— 1025 tility are removed from the ring and iiduiied, The outlets from the ring are so controlled that the en- tire system is maintained under a pressure sufficient to insure the desired molecular transformation. ‘‘Our process is to bé distinguished from those of the prior art, in which a. ring of liquid residuum is kept in circulation: 7 © Any residual oil re- sulting from the cracking operation. will necessarily - contain a considerable amount of carbon held in sus- pension in the oil and to circulate such a residue . through heated tubes is to continually pass into such | - tubes a large.amount of free carbon. In our system. we-do not circulate a. residuum, but instead keep the: residual oil removed from the application of external heat and-withdraw the heavier portions thereof (which contain the bulk of the carbon) from the cycle at the | eracking zone, and continue the cycle by means of the . vapor generated, which contains the condensable prod- uct desired and also certain heavier constituents which ~~. are used to complete the cyele. By removing the heavier residuum from the cycle, we keep the ring © free from this source of carbon formation, and since we conduct the actual cracking in a vessel unexposed to external heat, we are thus able to effectively re- move the carbon formed. @ : r ke * / ae * . e ‘‘In conducting the process with the apparatus il- lustrated, the oil to be treated is forced through the charging line 7 under considerable pressure, and -is . rapidly circulated through the heating coil 1, where. - it is heated to the desired.temperature. This tem- perature is generally from’ 50 to 100 degrees higher - . than the temperature at which it is desired to conduct the cracking ~ “That in connection with your adviee concerning. the advantages of the Adams claims, in relation to our installations, you will also express’ your own ideas. as to the particular nature of the interest which we should seek to acquire from Adams; whether a limited or exclusive license or purchase. ‘“‘Of course, we would be glad to have you express” any other ideas which you may have in mind regard- ing this whole matter and it may be that I have not covered here all the ground which was gone over thi- morning but I am giving you my ideas and 1 am - sending copies of this letter to Mr. Holmes and Mr. 1263 1265 Mackenzie, in order that if there are any doubtful points as: to what is desired they may be cleared up. °° 1519 DX 611 is a letter addressed to M r. James I. ’ Nesbitt, signed Foster, Freeman, Watson & Coit, per Coit, under date of June 15, 1918, which was shown to me by Mr. Nesbitt. This letter reads: ‘‘T have yonr letter of the 13th instant referring to the con¢lusions reached at our conference on June T3th at New York’ and your statement of the matter agrees with my understanding. I am leaving on a vacation of ten days or two weeks but will take this : matter up on my return. By.that time it is probable that the Commissioner will have rendered his deci. sion. I will, of course, go into the whole matter. keeping in, mind the general. purposes referred to in the interview and will report to you as to any mat ter which seems pertinent. “To am enclosing herewith a copy of the revised a 1036 Abstract'of Testimony on Merits. and believe it would be a good idea to embody a few claims relative to Auxiliary Furnace or Furnaces, and combinations or series of Cracking Chambers. This coil arrangement fer treating the Charge and Back Trap is the feature that is sure to make the batteries of two or more such stills such as we have been ex-. - perimenting on at West Side Pressure Still a success. It seems to me that it would greatly enhance the value _ of this patent to make such claims as are necessary to make this patent extend to arly arrangement of Crack- ing drfims and any Auxiliary Furnaces such /as are necessary to maintain the temperature in the single ’ Cracking Chamber or series of Cracking Chambers at the desired Cracking temperature. After the stills -have once reached working eonditions, this desired temperature (800° F. or nearabout) can be maintained with a very low furnace temperature. In a series of Cracking Chambers, it might require from 900-1100° I’. furnace temperature but this is'at a perfectly safe / temperature to preserve the strength of the iron and prevent hard sealing of the carbon.’” 1298 DX 621 is a letter under date of November 12, 1918, from myself to R. C. Holmes, informing Mr. Holmes that the application had been signed by the three ap- plicants, and unless he had ‘further thoughts it would be sent to Mr. Coit for filing. Mr. Holmes returned the letter to me with his approval on the sidé, and the ap- plication-was sent to Mr. Coit for filing. The long- ~ chand ‘note on the side of the letter is by Mr. Holmes and reads :: ; ; 1299- ‘*Mackenzie. I have no suggestions in the matter 11/16/18 R. C. H.”’ eae: ; 1300 _. After -this application had been sworn to by the three applicants, the. application was filed. 1300 1526 DX 622 is a letter under date of November 18, “1918, from myself to Mr. H. A. Thomas. and reads : _ gud: pe 1301 ‘‘T am sending you herewith application for a pat- ent of Holmes, Manley and Behimer; Foster, Free- man, Watson .and Coit docket No. 21,803. : ‘*T should be glad to have: you forward ‘this to _ Messrs. Foster, Freeman, Watson and Coit, request- - ing them-to file immediately and also have them pre- pare three copies of the application withdrawing, as | 1302 1303. 1304 1304 | Testimony of Kenneth G. Mackenzie. 1037 filed, one to be sent to Mr. R. C. Holmes, one to Mr. F. T. Manley and one to myself.”’ . 0 _ The Texas, Company operated a vapor phase proc- ess. at Bayonne in 1916 and 1917. I cooperated’‘in that operation.: The operation was in the direct charge of Mr. Louis deFlorez representing the Motor Petrol Company, the owners of the American patents and patent rights. ae These four units were installed: at the Bayonne lab-. oratory, of which I was in charge, so that I had gen- eral supervision, although I was not located at Bay- onne. I understood, at the time, the operation of these units there installed. In general, the sketch attached to DX 623 for ident.. represents the layout of one of the four Hall process -unit#installed at Bayonne. Oil was drawn from the | stor@ge tank G through a pump, through a pressure . stabilizing tank for the purpose of killing the pulsa- _ tions of the pump, then through a filter, then through’ | ~ a meter, then through an oil heater which, as I recall, did not heat, and then into a-coil of one-inch tubes suspended vertically in a furnace in the form of hair- pins with connecting U-tubes at the top. Leaving this coil of one-inch tube the pipe then went into a larger tube shown here as an 8-inch diameter, ‘which is 1527 my recollection, and from there into an open. cylinder. It entered the top of the cylinder, the product passing out through the bottom into a second cylinder which contained baffles which were. perfor-. ated. They are-shown here as trays, but as trays we usually think of more complicated fractionating ~ means. They were simply plates containing rather large holes at the top but not occupying the space in- dicated. ae : There was a coil for cooling the vapors, The vapors passed from the top of the second vertical chamber to the bottom of a fractionating column which con- tained fractionating trays with what we know as bub- _ ble caps, a liquid level being maintained on each tray - /through which the vapors bubbled to secure fractiona- ~ tion or separation of the heavy material from the lighter. ! ‘ ; The heavy material was drawn from‘the bottom of this fractionating column through cooling cojls into 1038 ; Abstract of Testimony on Merits, 1305 separate storage. The vapors were carried off from the top through a condenser, then into a separator sep- * arating the liquid condensed from the more or less - permanent gases and light vapors. The light vapors _--were then taken to a compressor where they were - compressed, and the compressed vapors were kom- mingled with the liquid ‘separated out in this ‘separa- . tor. — : . I might say that beyond the soparattr-there was a Atorage tank.of comparatively small size for the liquid _condensate which was picked up by a pump so that ‘finally the compressed gases a light vapors and the condensate or liquid were mixed together under high pressure, carried through further coolers and into : storage. . . 1305°1528 A very small amount of very heavy oil was withdrawn from the vertical cylinder or cham- ber that Ihave referred to which had the trays and the cooling coil in it. The percentage I do not recall but it was practically infinitesimal. ‘ _ The material that was withdrawn irom the bubble 1306 ‘tower was called light residue. » . The pressure, my recollection is, at the inlet, of somewheres around 100 pounds, was just sufficient . to force the oil through the tube. There was.no valve at the outlet end. of the tube. It was simply to over- ' comeé the friction of the “charge nestinn Wena. The temperature for cracking to gasoline was fairly close to 605 degrees Centigrade which, as Irecall, is some- wheres around 1100 degrees Fahrenheit. There were . four of these units. It is my recollection, although I ‘have not seen. any of these reports for some time, that we charged three gallons a minute per converter. During the operation of this unit, I made reports from time to time based upon data contained in log sheets. which were made: during the regular course ‘of the operation by the shift operators under mv ' general supervision. . DX 624. to 635, inclusive, are letters and reports written and prepared by ‘me with respect to this opera- ‘tion over the period from December, 1916 to Jan- uary, 1918. 1811 DX 626 in part reads: ‘‘Run 24. I would call your attention, however, | particularly to Run 24, on which we ran water white- 1311 ——_ - = % Testimony of Kenneth G. Mackenzie. - _ 1039 a, ° all four oy continuo for 2 peri ourteen days. I am a — erewit a of. this 14-day run, feauiet with averages of the oa * our converters and one con- — averages on tésts of the products pro- ‘Il am also sending you, under separate cover, a section af the bend of one of the converter tubes, taken from the hottest part of the furnace, together with a similar section taken from a new tube, for comparative purposes. You will see from this 1529 that the mn deposit is-practically nil: It © should be stated that tube was used not only for the fourteen days’ tinuous running, but also for all of the shorter runs in which Converter #2 was used, the records of which you already have or which are enclosed herewith. There does riot seem _ to be any doubt, in my mind, that either prime white -pletely precludes the use of any pet or water white can be run through this ~ pe for a very considerable length of time without any —, carbon formatiop.’’ . : X 628 in part states: ‘Carbon Formation. fact that the oil to be cracked in the Hall Process must.be vaporized, com- adem product wrich leaves q residue on evaporation. Thus either a burning oil distillate or a carefully distilled paraffin gas oil must be used. ey a . ‘What Is_The Hall Process. Bearing in mind the installation at Bayonne, the descriptions’of operation - given by Hall and others and 4he patents, the question may well be asked, What is the Hall Process? The Process, is actually carried out in Bayonne may he said to be: y (a) Passing oil through a coil of tubes. under pressure while subjecting it to a heat of about 600°C. (b) Passing the vapors from the 1-inch tube into an 8-inch tube. =, . ~ (c) Passing the vapors from the 8-inch tube into ‘three dephlegmators, the first of which is empty. In these dephlegmators the heavier oils are con, densed out. (d) Condensing by ‘a water-cooled condenser as * 1040. | s sucirc of Testimony on Merits. _ >> much as possibe of the light fractions, . leaving the ~. “third deph legmator. | . (e) Compressing the lightest gases . arid va oa ; not condensed .and after compression mixing the under, pressure, with the distillate from the water ae condenser. (f) Finally, condensing this mixture ‘under pres: = sure.’’ 1315 1530, DX 630 in part. reads: : \ | ‘*We have tried out two methods of refining of the Hall Motor. Spirit. . ‘‘The first method is the one proposed ty. the Motor Petrol: Company. ‘It cons ints, in passing the vapors through a column of Fullers Earth of 60'mesh, . the column or columns being jacketed so that they may be heated, and excessive. condensation of the vapors in the earth prevented. Our experiments have ’ thus far-not given any conclusive results. It is true . that this treatment. not only decolorizes, but also im- proves the odor of the product; but whetler this ; could be made economical, or whether the earth wil} ' beeome too rapidly exhausted, remains to be: seen. _. ‘The. other method is a simple acid treat. “Mr. ‘Detwiler-is somewhat familiar with this since we were working on. it when he was at Bayonne. ‘We found in ' preliminary experiments that ordinary concentrated sulfuric acid was not satisfactory. Not only was the reaction violent, with excessive heating, but the acid . stayed suspended as very minute particles for a long ‘period of time, during. which periods sulfur dioxid gas was continually evolved. By- making a mixture of 50% concentrated sulfuric acid and 50% water the heating up was materially reduced: ‘The sludge separated readily, and after neutralization with - | carbonate of soda the product could be. steam-stilled, ‘ leaving a water white distillate greatly improved in ° - « odor. The principal difficulty with this method was — oa that there has been an attendant loss of the very - volatile constituents, due to heating up. It might be _ possible to get 'a product of sufficient purity by treat- ing the heavier ends and then combining the very lightest material, either without treat or with a: ‘less severe treat: - 7 ig 1316 DX 632 ‘in part reads: ; ; “Run #101 (June 6, 7. and 8). On this run we used + Testimony of Kenneth G. Mackenzie. 1041 Paraffin Gas Oil, with steam in the cracking coils in order to see, if possible, whether the use of steam would prevent the excessive carbon deposits which we had found in the. dark red paraffin Gas Oil such as we are shipping regularly from Bayonne. It was. _necéssary to.use steam from the boilers, which never _ had a pressure of. over 100 lbs., with the result that 1316 the ‘feed of steam into the tubes was irregular and - our yields consequently varied. The total was also low. We found by the use of steam that the odor 1531. was ‘very much improved and, that the. unsat- _ urated, as showed by absorption and -stlfuric acid, was 10% to 20% lower than on both the residue . and distillate samples. = a \ ‘ | oe } | & ; ‘‘Summary. - ‘Carbon. During the’runs above recorded we had no trouble with carbon formation in the tubes. In Run #101 we were using Paraffin Gas Oil without redistillation, together with steam. On the. recom-’ . mendation of the Legal Department, however, it was .. necessary to. conclude this test on June 8th. Up to that time there had been no. appreciable carbon trouble. Whether steam would eliminate the carbon accumulation from dirty Paraffin Gas Oil remains: to be determined. _ will givé a product with a better odor. “Use of Stedm. We have proved, from the limited experiments which we have made, that steam, when . ‘mixed with the oil vapor in the cracking tube, will reduce the. percentage of unsaturated ~~ and ur experi- ments were not of sufficient duration to be quanti-. > tative. ‘We have further shown that even the introduction of steam into the vapor line, between the converter - coils and the dephlegmator, will appreciably sweeten -. the resulting product. This is somewhat unexpected since we have believed that the possibility. of any chemical reaction in this-tube was slight. This fact - may have a bearing on some of the Hall patents in which a supplementary cracking reactionNis claimed | in this vapor tube. . 2 ee ‘*Refining With Fullers Earth. Because of the fine 1042 . “Abstract of Testimony on. Merits. | grace of Fullers Earth at Bayonne, our ex eriments ' proved. thereby. f still believe it may 1317 refining the lightest hydrocarbons, and passing them through Palare Earth were not particularly successful, although the odor was ng Sagoo im- possible to use this: method for refining the lightest constituents and work will be continued on it. ‘‘ Unsaturated. a, The results obtained . on these runs confirm our past experience that: the _ percentage of | pene don hydrocarbons in the naphtha distallate is almost 100% greater when crack- ing with Paraffin Gas Oil than when cracking | kero- sene.’ . DX 634 in part reads: 1532 ‘Conclusions: As iy the Burton ‘Prices, we - finally condense in the Hall Process under pres- . sure. This gives us a product containing considerable compression gasoline, which is very difficult to hold. We have, moreover, a disadvantage as compared with » the pressure still product, in that we have a. larger percentage of unsaturated hydrocarbons, and .there- . ' fore a greater tendency to heat up on acid treating, ‘+ method of procedure, whereb causing still further loss of the compression gasoline. For this reason I am -convinced that the present — all of the naphtha, i in- cluding the compression’ gasoline, is recovered in one eut, will not be satisfactory in practice. I conclude this assuming that we will use an acid treat for re- fining. The Hall people propose the use of Fullers «. Karth which .would to a certain extent, possibly, cut -dewn the losses. Work. which we did at Bayonne, however, was not satisfactory, the Fullers Earth be:ng .- apparently very rapidly exhausted. The next pos- sibility was the use of Fullers Earth for the very light product, acid treating the heavier.ends. We will work further on this_as soon as we finish our run oni ’ Paraffin’ Gas Oil,~ strictly ee to the Hall 1318 ‘method.’’. -” DX 635-in1 part reads: ‘‘}-ain transmitting herewith a record of the Hall Proeess for the month of October, November and December, 1917. . ‘*October. | | ‘The October figures are divided into two parts ; the total is ) ae given, the first covering the _— : . throughout this month wit ‘what less than 900 gallons of Prime White which it was necessary to use in an emergency. Testimony of Kenneth Gi, SMedheunie. | 1043 up to October 12, in which distilled paraffin gas oil was used, the other period covering from the 12th to - the end of the month, in which light yellow paraffin gas. oil was used. The total converter. hours ‘for this month’ were 1488 against a possible maximum of 2976. “x ovember. es. ‘Light yellow pared gas oil was ‘used the exception of some- ae Observations. . “The most important observations which we have 1318. made over this period are as follows: 1533 ‘‘1. ‘ It is not possible with any grade of par- -’ affin gas oil we have yet tried to get as saturated a product, dr, on the average, as high a yield as with Prime White kerosene. «62. A properly distilled paraffin gas oil, such as the product which we have been running since the 8th. of December and testing as follows, may be used with-_ out appreciable carbon formation in the tubes ov era long period of time. ms ad rod “3. The light yellow paraffin gas oil mentioned above is a much better material to crack than the re- distilled. paraffin gas oil obtained from the usual stocks which we market from Bayonne. This is shown by the following distillations :’ The purpose of. operating this process at the Bayonne plant of The Texas Company was primarily . - to determine whether it was a‘process which we would 1319, 1319 . or would not wish to install in our refineries. We had — an agreemént as to licensing rights under this | process. I cannot remember all of the details as to-our options, _ i, we finally purchased the-Hall patents. 1534 Cross-Examination by Mr. Blenko. The installation of the Hall unit at Bayonne began about the spring of 1916. The first run was made "1320 November 23,-1916. At that time the industry was 1321 interested in, racking and the Texas Company was" 1044 Abstract af Téstimony on Merits, actively: engaged in a substantial amount of research - work attempting to develop. cracking processes for use in its plants. Penne ; | ' The first runs with the Hall process at Bayonne were made with kerosene as a charging stock. Later, a paraffin gas oil was used. The kerosene charge was ahout 42 Baume gravity; the paraffin gas oil charge was about 36 Baume. oe aes - 1322. Attempts were also made to crack the light residue produced from kerosene and paraffin gas oil runs in the Hall unit but experience showed it could not be © successfully put back through the coils. DX 627 is an accurate summary of the runs made in the early‘ part ‘of the experimentation with the Hall process. This report shows that from February 19th to February 26, . 1917, The Texas Company ran the Hall process on a light residue produced from running kerosene, but 1323 found it to be utterly unsuitable for rerunning, be- cause the coils very quickly plugged up with coke. The light residue had tobe distilled, to remove a small amount of the light residue which would produce coking in the coils before it could be rerun. _ ‘Attempts were made to use the Hall process to - produce benzol and toluol for ammunition purposes. - > Nal shows this was from March 7 to March 30, 1325» The Hall process was always a once-through oper-_. . ation unless you wished to reprocess. some of. the products for recharging. It was not recycling. The character of the light residue was such that it could not be recycled. It could only be used in another 1535 run at some subsequent date, after distillation, - to remove the bottoms. 1326 . Neither was-it physically possible to recycle the light residue inthe Hall operation, because the equip- ment was not set up for recycling. ; =, The following excerpts from DX 627, relative to the a experiments at Bayonne, correctly states the acts, ee . | “Light Residue” _ ‘ **The chronological record on the running of light residue is as follows: — € - . e * _ ‘This excessive carbon formation occurred, as far Testimony. of iteanetle G. Mackenzie. 1045 as we could: judge, at the point in the coils where the oil was completely vaporized, and might be termed — carbon of vaporization rather than carbon of crack- ing. In other words, this residue will not distil com- pletely without leaving a residue of carbon or coke. ~~ “Such. being the case, it was necessary to distil this , *, 90% off and leaving 10% bottoms whi residue and this was done, running 5 eomery ged would be available for fuel oil but could be worked up into other es products."* 1327 DX 629 shows that when using paraffin gas oil: charge, it was found impossible to run longer than 72 hours because of carbon formation in the tubes in the furnace. The paraffin gas oil which ssibly was dark red in color first had to be distilled t to a pale yellow color in order-to secure satisfactory operation. Kero- sene could be run successfully. ‘The following excerpt from DX 629 correetly states the facts: “We found, however, that it was impossible to ran” on this paraffin gas oil longer than about 72 hours, when so much carbon was formed -in‘’ certain tubes | in the front of the furnace that it was necessary .to shut down the converter and clean out the tubes. The carbon formed in this case was, very similar, and occurred in the same tubes, as that found in running the residue from kerosene without. redistillation - 1536 ‘and is, in my mind, entirely. carbon of va riza- 1328 . "4309 tion rather than carbon of cracking. This is confirmed, as will be seen below, by the runs on the distilled paraffin gas oil, on which we at the time of writing have been running seven days without any appreciable: carbon formation.’’ Experimentation on the Hall apparatus continued ,” almost without interruption up to the beginning of 1920.. The plant was then closed down and subse- quently dismantled. Mr. deFlorez, the representative of the Motor Pet- rol Company holding the American patents of William A. Hall, and ‘I, supervised the Hall operation at es Bayonne. The Hall process was sbanieiie’ because .the cost was too high, which was due entirely to excessive formation of fixed gases. The charging stocks used were expensive. 1046 . Abstract of Testimony on Merits. 1330. ‘*Q. Your.own experimental work showed that the color and- the odor could ‘be removed from the Hall _ product, is that correct? - ‘+ **A. Oh, it could be satisfactorily treated; yes.’’ , The gasoline from the Hall process and that pro _ dueed in the Burton process would both perform equally well in a*car. Under some conditions the Hall process gasoline would behave better than the | 1333 PX 636 isa letter from me to R. C. Holmes, dated / 7 j May 5, 1917, headed ‘‘Hall Process Construction Expense,’’ setting forth the expenses incurred in in- ‘ stalling the Hall process at Bayonne as $64,685.18. 1334 According to a notation by R. -C. Holmes on an accountant’s tabulation taken from the files of The 1336 Texas Company, entitled ‘‘Bayonne Hall-Process, Re- -sult Operations November 22, 1916, to June 1, 1917,"" PX 637, the cost of gasoline is 68¢ per gallon. The processing costs of the Hall -process-are $66,419.91; the return $34,784.16; and the deficit $31,635.75. / 1338 PX 637 shows that 7.4% of the charge oil in . 1537 the Hall process was converted to gasoline. 1339 - In some of the later runs of the Hall process, steam was injected into the heating coils with the oil. Coking in the Hall vapor phase process took place 1341 at the poinf in the coil where the material became substantially all vapor. The coke formed at just one - particular point in the coil. This appears from page 23 of my final report DX 628 and my supplemental report DX* 631. | fie ty sae | he Hall process was installed by The Texas Com- pany ag an experiment to determine its commercial feasibility.- The unit was of # commercial size rec- ommended by Hall. If the Hall process had worked out The Texas Company would have installed quite a number of the Hall units in its plant. —_ a i The Hall process was finally dropped because o 1342 the high cost. The apparatus was torn down and never reinstalled again as a Hall process. __ Behimer Application—-DX 599: The Behimer ap- plication was originally the Holmes, Manley and Be- himer application, but ultimately issued as a Behimer ' patent. e Behimer application was referred to as ; the Coil and Drum case. I had no. contact with the Te ining of Kenne th G. Mackenzie, 1047 . patent work of The Teake Company after January 1919. . 1343. - The law department of The Texas Company listed the Behimer application as Holmes, Manley, and Behimer, with Mr: Coit’s docket number 21803. 1 did riot intend-te-everlook any merition, in direct - _examination, of my discussion with Mr. Coit on May . __1844 14, 1918, of supposed -confiet-with the application_of —— J oseph H. Adams. The Adams applications were being. prosecuted by Mr. Coit and: The Texas Company had arrangements. to have access to.the Adams 1538 applications. Mr. Coit was attorney for both i the Adams applications and the Holmes,’ Man- — ley and Behimer ‘application. Subsequently, . The Texas Company acquired the Adams’ patents. The 1346 Texas Company sued Warner-Quinlan in 1925 on one - of the Adams patents. The — patent which was sued en*was the one—which- ieation fornr and was being handled by Mr. “it at the time that it was decided to withhold the filing of the Behimer case. ~ 1349 PX 638 consists of Patent 1,428,388 to Frederick . T. Manley; Patent 1,462,143 to Frederick T. Manley ; ie Patent 1 428, 339 to Frederick = Manley.;. and Patent~—_ _- 1,640, 202 to Frederick T.:Manley, all assigned to The — . Texas Company. All, these Saint were filed in the years 1917 and 1918. 1351 I distinetly remember having seen one or two ver- . tical still ‘cases applied for by Mr. Manley. Hall Process, -D Dx 626: . The end point of the water 1352 white kerosene employed as a charging stock in the - Hall process was 548° F. and was satisfactory. DX ‘631:. The charging stock in-the Hall process, —**Distilled Paraffin Gas Oil,’’ had an end-point which. : - ran from 564 to 620: This stock was satisfactory. 1353 Gas Oils having an end-point of 710 and 690 respec- tively were found unsuitable as charging stock for the Hall process. DX 632: The end point of the. wiidistilled light 1354 residue from the Hall process was 678: T assume this . Yresidue: would coke the tubes very badly. ° \ 1355 Light residues having end points in: “tho \neighbor- hood of 575 might fall into the standard fraction known as kerosene, but. would not be particularly good kerosene because of the high end point. 1355 ee Abstract: of Testimony on Merits: 1539 Redirect Examination by Mr. Theiss. I have tried to puzzle out what the blending stock with a yield of 11.16 shown on PX 637 was. Blending stock in general is a product which ‘reqiires a small amount of a very volatile product such as natural gasoline to give it the right distilling range. I assume: that is the reason since they appraise that on the mar- ket at 12 cents and the gasoline at 16.- I would as- sume that was a part of our product in that operation. Of course, I have not seen these figures before. I didn’t know of their.existence, and have no idea how they were determined. If suitable for blending Ww ‘ith natural gasoline, the — ___ blending steek plus the gasoline would be more nearly ~; correct as a yield than the yield that I gave for gaso- line alone on that operation: I don’t know at all how -the thing was figured out or what they concluded 1358 was gasoline or blending stock. The record does, not show who prepared PX 637. Any temperature at all below 605 Centigrade, which is 1121 Fahrenheit, is practically no cracking or gives very little cracking. -It seems to be at least as applied to kerosene a more or less critical point. We used that temperature in craeking for gasoline, but if we _ wanted to produce gas for mustard gas, or tolulol for 1359 1359 -the temperature had little effect on the clean explosive, it was necessary to go to a higher tempera- ture. In order to crack I think we went: as high as. 735° Centigrade. As we increased our temperature we would not have to clean our stock. Apparently ated of the stock. _ Asfar as we could ditermine this carbon de- 1540 posit was left. on the evaporation of the oil rather than as a result of cracking. ~, We did not make very long runs even in our: mines ' for the Ordnance Department in determining what could be done to the benzol or tolulol or in our work | with the warfare service in producing the maximum _amount of ethylene for mustard gas manufacture. . They were all of comparatively short duration. The Anderson-Prichard ‘case referred to was A case in which The Texas Company was suing under the .Behimer patent. _ Testimony of Ben R. Schneider. : 1049 ~ 1541 BEN R, SCHNEIDER, Winchester, Mass. : ae it ee pa ° _ Direct Examination by Mr. Neuman. ‘2122 = 1 entered the employ of The Texas at the Port Ar- 2123 thur Refinery in late May or early June, 1916. I was -in that employ until late summer or early fall of 1917. . ‘The first part of the time I spent there, was in -the. _ drafting room ‘on drafting work. The latter -part of. the period I spent there on outside engineering work. 2124 - After a tracing was completed it was checked for accuracy, details, entered in the tracing record, dated as of the date on which it was entered and eg wand and thé same date entered on the tracing: The tum- ber which was placed upon the tracing was procured from the tracing record and they. were taken in nu- merical order as the tracings were finished. i The date entered in the tracing record and upon the completed tracing would be the date of. the com- '. pletion’ of the tracing. , 2125 - I made the original tracing 1703-Y, DX 669, and most of the printing in the title box was placed there ° . by me. Fhe 12-and the 16 on date 12-7-16 are my 2127 figures. I don’t know about the 7. There has. been a change made, and I don’t know anything abaut it. ‘I do not reeall what number I originally placed in this ' box in connection with the numerals 12 and 16. | 2128 DX 733 is a recérd of all the tracings made in the Port Arthur drafting room. It shows the number-of— ’ the tracing, the date on which it was made or com- pleted, the title, the scale, the size of the drawing and dates of amy revisions that may have been made at a \.\ later time. . : - 212851542 Tracing No. 1703 is indicated on this. tracing record, and according to the tracing record, 1703: was eompleted on’ 12-4-16. In view of the tracing rec- ord I am now enabled to state that I originally placed . the date of December 4, 1916 in the lower box on — tracing 1703. : ; ee Se, - 2129 No date appears opposite 1703, but.a check mark ~ ’ appears opposite 1703; the check mark is just a ditto « mark, being the same date as the date shown above, 2130 and the preceding date is 12-4-16. The notation ‘‘ High pressure still experiment 2000’’ is in my handwriting. . _ 00 2131 Abstract of T estimony an Merits. The date 1-29-17 appears in connection with the rinted word ‘‘ Revised’’ in the box in the lower right. nd corner. There was quite a discussion concern- - ing whether the end of this trap should be tinues ut mainin; ion 1€ CO; Su ing that we had the of defendant's coil ca in some manner and the coil fall ef liquid oil, , and you applied heat, you would not then get vapori- zation. If you did not provide some way for the vapor _ to expand then it-cannot form, of course, and you sim- 3071 2072. ply develop more pressure in the coil, and if you con- tinue that of course you would have a pressure de- veloped eventually sufficient to break the coil, cause a. rupture of the pipe. ~ t us assume a kettle or a vessel with a closed lid . tight on and just an outlet of any length, and assume that the kettle is full of oil and that you are supplying heat sufficient to cause rapid vaporization, or boiling of tlie oil, those vapors.as they are formed in the body of the oil will rise to the surface,. up into the vapor space and on out the spout. If that same kettle ix so mounted that instead — stationary it is in violent agitation, some reciprocal motion that will keep it all churned up inside, half full and all 1576 churned‘up, the same things happen, of corrse, except that instead of the vapors being able to rise to the surface of the oil and escape, they remain ‘mixed up with the oil, and with that sort of a condition instead of just having the vapor pass out the spout you would have a mixture of vapor and liquid pass out the spout. You would have the same vapor forma- tion, the same amount. of vapors fo and that would be absolutely the only difference. - - Heat is consumed in cracking, first of all in raising the temperature of the oil to the cracking temperature. That heat we call sensible heat, the name being de- rived from the fact that effect of heating is percéptible to. the senses just as, for example, we take a pan of — cool water and apply heat to it we can notice the effect of that heat by putting our hands in the water, we find . that the water becomes warmer until if it is continued, it becomes uncomfortable and finally would result in a burn. That is sensible heat. 4 Then when the oil reaches the cracking temperature and commences to crack, we find that heat is consumed in the chemical reaction of cracking itself, that is it takes heat to bring about this cracking, this breaking up of the larger molecules into smaller molecules. Pa 1068 ‘ Abstract of Testimony on Merits. Heat is absorbed in. the chemical reaction, and we e call that the heat of reaction, : We also find that heat is absorbed i in the vaporiza- . tion operation; that is, when the oil starts to vaporize, . _ 8075 whether as a result merely. of its natural vapor pres-. sure or as the result of the vapor pressure 1577 brought about by the cracking, this heat is ab-. - sorbed in the vaporization action itself, and that heat is called the heat of vaporization or the latent heat of vaporization. “Latent heat, the adjective ‘*latent’’ is applied because in dealing with a pure compound vaporization takes place without a change of temperature, heat is absorbed and we do not find any change of temperature, we merely find that vapor- ization has taken plaee. In a vaporization of a mixed liquid like petroleum, the thermonieter does not cease to rise at a given point when yaporization begins. In the vaporization of a mixed liquid we find that as vaporization progresses ‘the temperature actually does rise. Now. that is brought about by the fact that when vaporization of this mixed liquid starts, we find that the constituents _of the liquid which have the lower, boiling point are vaporized to a greater extent. than the constituents ‘which have a higher boiling point, and consequently 3074 3078 3079 - 8079 the vapors which come off are richer in the lower boil- ing constituents than they aré in the higher boiling constituents. That as it progresses, of course, strips the residual liquid of some of the lower boiling con- stituents thereby changing its composition somewhat and the changed composition causes the oil to boil at a progressively. higher temperature. _T may have one of several meanings in the use of these words ‘‘liberation’’*or ‘‘separation’’, which I take to be synonymous. We may speak, I may speak of the ‘separation which takes place when vapors 1578 pass off from a vessel, as for example, when the vapors pass out of the spout of a tea kettle. That would be a form of separation or liberation. I may “use it in the sense of segregation, such. as takes place in a container, let’s say, like in a bottle, in a seltzer bottle for example, we have ‘separation there because . the water solution is segregated in the lower part of the bottle and the gas is segregated in the upper part of the ate Now that is a form of separation. . Testimony of Howard V, Smith. ~ ." 1069 Another form of,separation or-liberation is that which takes place whén ¢aporization itself takes place in the sefse that some of the molecules of the liquid - or the solid separate or liberate themselves from the — ‘remaining liquid or solid molecules. Now that is the form of separation or liberation which takes place when a bubble is formed in a body of liquid, or it may occur at the surface of the liquid, the quiet surface of the liquid. It is the actual transformation of the liquid -or the solid from that state into the vapor state. In that sense, liberation or separation is identical with 3080 vaporization itself. It is the moleéular transforma- . tion of the liquid or solid state into the vapor state. The Court: ‘Q.: In any one of the four examples . you have given? og . : A. I just gave three, vour Honor. The Court: Three, 1 see. In any one of the three. 3082 - When vapor bubbles form and rise to the surface of the liquid and pass off, vaporization does occur, and it occurs when'the vapor bubbles form. . 30821579 The rising of the bubbles to the surface of the liquid and their’ passing: off therefrom is not . * vaporization or any part “ef vaporization: Those things ave something which follow the vaporization ~ step. , 3083s have said that liberation or separation of vapors ‘might mean to me the segregation of vapors from liquid. Segregation in tiat sense, or separation or liberation in that sense of segregation, is no vapor- ization. : ) : I gave the example of a seltzer bottle partly full of water, the remainder of the bottle being filled with gas. That represents a condition of segregation. _ .Now, if I take that seltzer bottle and shake it up vio- ' Tently so as to thoroughly mix the gas or vapor part. with the liquid part, then I no longer have separation - or liberation in the sense of segregation. If I set the bottle down. once more the two segre- | gate again. oS | In those operations where first I mix the two phases intimately ‘together and then, second, permit them to separate or liberate in the sense of segregation, there was no formation of vapor from liquid, there was no condensation of vapor into liquid, merely a mixing. 1070. ~~ Abstract of Testimony ow Merits. Since there was no formation of vapor fromthe li- 3084 quid there was no vaporization in that operation. '. Liberation or separetion of vapors might mean to me the passing off of vapors from the vessel.. This is + not vaporization. | : 3084 1580 The passing off is a form of separation or lib- eration which has nothing to do with the vapor- ization itself. Vaporization might take place at some point remote from the vessel, as for example if the liquid were being heated in a coil and discharged inte the vessel, vaporization could take place in the coil itself. Then after the vapor and liquid is discharged - jnto the vessel the vapor would separate and pass off. Now the vaporization in that case takes place outside of the vessel before the material enters the vessel. The separation in the sense of passing off is some- thing subsequent to the vaporization. _-I think the meaning of separation or liberation as the molecular ‘flying ‘off of vapor is perhaps a. little . more difficult to understand. Our:concept of vapor- . 3085 ization, that is the for.nation of the vapor.state from . the liquid or the soiid state, is that some of the mole- cules of the liquid or the solid disengage themselves from the remaining liquid or solid molecules. That disengaging of some of the molecules from the liquid or solid portion is the very act of creation of the y vapor. That is, you cannot have vapor except as a—— "separate entity from the liquid or the solid, so-that in é that sensé of separation or liberation the act of crea- — /_ tion or the vaporization itself is an act of separation, . but that takes place whether or not the vapor is formed as a bubble within liquid or whether it takes place =. separation at a quiescent surface of li- ‘quid. ; 3085 1581 In this sense-of ‘molecular separation or lib- - eration of-vapors from liquid, separation. or : liberation occurs in defendant’s cracking coil because vapors are formed in the stréam of oil as it flows throngh the cracking coil, and as a bubble of vapor . forms in that stream of oil you have this separation or liberation of that particular particle of vapor from the liquid portion of the oil. 3086 1 don’t recall ever having heard ‘‘separation”’ in- cluded as a necessary step or element of vaporization, é ——— erate for an extended period without the necessity _ of cleaning. | ) : 1074 3094 3094 8099 Aids of Testimony on Merits. Then he goes on to say" how that is to be accom- plished. He says, ‘‘and in which that part of the system containing the precipitated carbon, is free from subjection to any excessive heat.’ Now, in other words, he is going to carry oua erack- ing operation of a degree of intensity which will form carbon and will precipitate carbon. Now,.in a process where the cracking is s taking place in a part of the system which is subjected ‘to’a 1586 strong heating, the formation and precipitation of carbon is an extremely dangerous thing. In -fact if it is allowed to continue it would be a disas- trous thing. So that-in an operation where the crack- ing is so conducted that the carbon will be precipi- tated in a zone which is only mildly heated we have a solution of that carbon problem. 1y this patent we have established a =, which permits that being done. I like to call that principal the fireless cooker principle. It used to be a popular. method of cooking food té conduct the cooking opera- tion in: what was known as a fireless cooker. This ‘ operation was carried out by heating the food up to— an active cooking temperature and then transferring a. it over into a heavily insulated vessel where the heat was maintained and in which the cooking continued because of the maintenance of that heat for an ex- tended period of time. Now, in those fireless cookers ‘it was the practice to have some auxiliary’ plates ‘ which were heated separate from the food container and. which,,were placed inthe part of the. insulated receiver where the vessel was contained, so as to supply some heat for bringing up the insulated ves- sel itself to the temperature and for taking care of heat losses. That is, while there was no fire applied to the food in the fireless cooker there was some small 3095 amount of auxiliary heat supplied through these hot plates which were inserted in the part of the vessel or part of the cooker which received the cooking vessel. | Now, we have that same sort of a system estab- lished in this patent, and the C tubes, which is the part where the carbon is to be precipitated, are not subjected to any excessive heat. The oil is heated ~ up in the. B’ tubes to the cracking temperature 1587 and the cracking is initiated i in there; but in this Testimony of Howard V. Sniith.. °° 1075 3096 highly heated condition the oil is then. transfer red “to these ( tubes which are not excessively heated. In there the cracking continues because of this time fac- tor effect which I discussed this morning and thie cracking continues and is completed in those tubes, and cracking may ‘be cafried on to the point where carbon is formed and deposited in those tubes and it _ does no harm until it has accumulated to a point where the tubes would be excessively filled’ with carbon so ___ that they could no longer act to hold a substantial quantity” of oi?. * = That object, as I say, is a very important part of this patent. . , Before passing to the-next objectI go back to the preceding one where it speaks of- returting the reflux . free from any substantial amount of earbon. 3097 Carbon, of course, would mean the coke or carbon which is formed in these cracking operations if we carry them far enough, -and we may presume, natur- ally, that if carbon is formed we also have these tars _ ‘and. asphaltenes which accompany the carbon, so that- I would say that that means the reflux is to be re- turned substantially free -of -earbon and these tars -and asphaltenes which would accompany the carbon. 3097 The next object begins at line 31, “*To provide a process in which the reflux condensate is continuously ‘removed from the refluxing coudensing apparatus and returned to the inlet side of the system.’ 1588. hat, I believe, adds the sense of continuity of removal of the reflux and return. The. next object beginning at line 35, ‘‘To provide a process in which the vapors not initially condeased are finally caused to pass through. a single passage ' for-a secondary condensing action.’ : 3098 That is, the vapors which pass through the aerial system and on up through this aerial condenser (i’ and are not condensed therein pass on over to the final condenser G3. He says, ‘‘and in general to provide an improv ed process and also a novel apparatus of the character referred to.” In other words, he considers that his apparatus is: novel as well as the proeess. I now summarize the information I. derive from | thig patent from a statement of its objects and indi- “* 1076 : Abstract of. Testimony on Merits. cite on DX 772 the apperatne prov ided for carrying out those objects. In the first place he says he wants to establish this cycle in which the oil to be treated is fed through the " eracking zone and through a vapor zone and part of the vapor is condensed and returned to the inlet side of the cracking zone.’ In-the second place, he is to - continuously withdraw the carbon containing residue. 3099 In the third place the part of the system in which carbon will precipitate is not to be subjected to any excessive ‘heat; in other words, the fireless cooker principle. 1589 The other objects, I believe, can be said to comprise merely the thought of continuity of . some of these operations and the final condensing of the: desired product, and the thought. that the ap- paratus itself is novel. I failed to point out where those objects are ac- complished, but the first one is the cycle step in the B tubes and the C tubes, the cracking zone, the aerial pipes E, header G, air condenser G’, as the vapor zone, - and the return through the line F’ to the inlet of the -eracking zone. The carbon containing residue is ‘withdrawn through line K regulated by the valve H’. The C tubes are the zone which is not to be sub- jected to éxcessive heat, and that is the zone where carbon is to be precipitated. . A description of the ‘operation. which further - throws light upon the objects which Dubbs seeks to 3100 achieve in this patent is to be found on page 1, begin- ning with line 71, which says: ‘*Deseribing. the operation of the process, the mate- rial to be treated is drawn from any suitable source by means of the pump J and discharged therefrom through line J’ into and through tubes B and during the time they are passing through said tubes, they are subjected to sufficient heat to cause the desired amount of cracking. 1d Now, that says that the oil is to be fed through this line J’ and the B tubes by means of the pump J and | | . that in the B tubes the oil is to receive its cracking 3100 heat, that is the heat to cause the desired amount of ~ eracking. New, it is significant that he does not 1590 say where that heat is to act to bring about - this cracking. He simply says that that heat is to cause the desired amount of cracking. | irs! Testimony of. rants V. Smith, ~ /1077 It will be quite a coma from the patent that that heat is to act in the B tubes and the C tubes. ‘*Said oil is then passed into the tubes C which are only partially filled with the oil and as the oi\passes through these tubes, there is a liberation of vapors from same and which vapors pass up through the vapor tubes D, E and into header G and through aerial condenser G’, through line G2, through water condenser G3 and discharged through pressure reg- . 3101 ulating' valve H.’’ Now, in that he says that the oil as it passes through these C tubes is going to liberate vapors. We might “wonder why the oil would liberate vapors in passing through those C tubes if we were not acquainted with how this cracking reaction takes place, but whén we - consider that the oil enters these C tubes at the max- imum temperature it has been heated in the B tubes ’ to an active cracking temperature and is delivered to the C tubes at that cracking temperature and it flows - along through these C tubes, naturally because of ~ the temperature and the time factor working together there is cracking of the oil, and the light products formed by the cracking vaporize and liberate them- ‘selves from the liquid and pass on up into the aerial ‘ system through the pipes D. You will note that there are four of these D pipes . provided so that the vapors can escape from these tubes substantially as rapidly as they are formed there. It is: provided with outlets for the vapors. - . right along through these C tubes. . 3101- 1591 Continuing with the operation, beginning: at 3102 ~_—siline 87, it says: ‘*The portion of vapors condensed while passing through vapor lines E, manifold G and aerial con- denser G’ are automatically drained back through these’ lines into drainage line F and from there through line F’ enter into line J’ and back into the heating tubes B.’’: : _Now, there he is establishing this cycle of reflux return through this aerial condensing system and run- | back line F’ and J’ into the heating tubes. That is the thing that he describes in his first object. The residue left in the coil C is drawn off through line K through pressure regulating vaive ‘H’, to any suitable place. — » 1078 Abstract of Testimony on Merits. \ Now, that is the thing that he sets up in his second object. That is the residue withdrawal. The carbon containing residue is.withdrawn through this line K\ regulated by valve H’: Then he says presszre is maintained on the entire — and is regulated by the valve H. The valve is over on the outlet of the final condenser, so that he is maintaining the pressure on the entire ap- paratus, and this pressure is to aid him in the crack- ing operation : ; hen in the next. sentence he’ speaks of a pressure regulated by the valve H. : n the sentence beginning at ‘line. 93. the patent states: ‘*The residue left i in the coils C is drawn off through line K through pressure regulating valve H, to any 3103 - .: suitable place.’’ 3103 1592 Then in the next sentence immediately he . es says: ‘*Pressure is maintained. on the entire apparatus and is regulated by the valve H.’’. The second statement is the correct-one. Of course the pressure is maintained and regulated by the valve H. And valve H’, of course, is actually a liquid level - .control valve rather than a pressure control valve. | 3104 ~—s'T_ failed to point out here that he in describing the apparatus back at line 52 says that B are the cracking tubes and C are the vaporizing tubes. “Now, from that I understand that B are the erack- ing tubes because. in those the cracking heat is ap- plied to the oil and the cracking is initiated in there. -C are the vaporizing tubes. The C tubes, of course, we find are maintained at the same pressure as the B’ tubes, and the oil is brought in there in a heated con- dition and the heat" is conserved in there. The tubes are larger in size. They are 10-inch tubes, as contrasted with 4inch tubes, so that they will holda ° larger quantity of oil, and in that way he provides time and temperature to continue and to complete: the cracking reaction. ‘ He identifies the cracking zone in the objects them- selves, as.I pointed out earlier, because he says that the reflux is returned to the inlet of the eracking Zone 3105-and the carbon containing residue is withdrawn from the cracking zone.- Now that automatically takes in 3105 Testimony of Howard V. Smith.° 1079 the B and the C tubes together as the cracking zone. But he divides his cracking zone into these two parts. The first part he calls the B tubes jor the cracking | _ «tubes, or he calls them also the heating tubes, 1593 and the second part he “ealls| the vaporizing . - tubes or the C tubes. | Pressure conditions are uniform throughout. the cracking zone bécause, as he says, |thes pressure is maintained on the entire apparatus and regulated by the valve H which is on the outlet of the final con- denser., The pressure would necessarily be uniform throughout the cracking zone because he depends upon a gravity return for his reflux from the aerial system into the inlet of the cracking zone. Now, if there was .any substantial difference in pressure between the C tubes and the B tubes the small amount of gravity bead provided by that elevation of the aerial system - would not be sufficient: to overcome that difference - and instead of the feed stock flowing into the inlet . Of the B tubes we would find that the feed would flow 3106 back up into the aerial system, so that the pressure _ conditions are necessarily uniform throughout the | cracking zone. . The difference in size between the 10- inch C tubes and the 4-inch-B tubes will not\cause any lowering of pressure in the C tubes. The inere*sizé of the con-* ~ tainer has nothing to do with the pressure in the con- tainer. You see that the B tubes ahd the C tubes are in open communication ‘with each other through that pipe whieh “connects them, and any difference in pres- sure between the B and the € tubes would be rapidly .’ equalized through that pipe. In other words, if a~- pressure difference existed there of any substantial amount it would bring about a rapid flow ofvoil from . the B tubes into the C tubes until that pressure was | equalized. 6 1594 It does not make any differenéé-with respect ° to the pressure whether the vapors are. sep: : arated or segregated from the liquid;-in the sense that’ there is a layer of vapor above and liquid below; _ or whether or not the vapor is ‘mixed up with the \. _ = Mere mixing or lack of mixing has nothing what- ever to do with the pressire « conditions. I think we could illustrate that again by the seltzer 1080 Abstratt of Téstimony on Merits. “ bottle which I have. used before. As we all know there is a pressure in the seltzer bottle while ‘the vapor and the liquid are segregated from each other, and if we tak€ the seltzer bottle and shake it up 80 as to mix the vapor and the liquid intimately together the pressure inside the bottle remains the same. It doesn’t alter the pressure at all to either have the two mixed together or to have them separated. Dubbs devotes the next paragraph on page 1 to the third object, relating to the part of his system where carbon is precipitated. That is beginning at line 99. He says: | . , , ‘*A light fire may be maintained under the tubes C ‘as shown in the drawings or/said tubes may be 3108 3108 heavily insulated with cel-o-cel insulating material or any other well known insulating material to prevent loss of heat by radiation and thereby dispense with the fire under the tubes C.”? - - There he, identifies definitely the zone which is not to be subjected.to.any excessive heat, and that is the zone, of course, where he intends to precipitate his carbon.: — nee P : Continuing with that paragraph he says: 1595 = ** The bed of the. liquid in the tubes C is . ascertained by. trycocks H2, H3, H4 and the level controlled. by valve H’.’’ pe There he tells us what the function of that valve H’ is which he up here called a pressure regulating valve. That valve is used to regulate the level of the oil in the C tubes. ~ : Continuing: , would say that he indicates that ‘‘gen- 3161 Testimony ‘of Howard V. Smith. i 1101 erated vapors” indicate rather separated vapors. than | vapors intimately mixed, from that use of the word. Referring to the Dubbs patent in suit as issued, and to claim 1, the phrase ‘‘removing the residue after said vaporization,’’ referring to the vaporiza- tion in the C tubes, does not mean removing the resi- due after vapors are both formed and separated from the liquid oil in the C tubes: I don’t think that includes the separating step in the sense of a segregation which takes place. in those tubes. The residue takes its form when the vapor forms. That is, when the vapor is created the char- acteristics of the residue are determined at that time; that is, it becon +s residue as the vapor is created. Q: Now referring to the defendant’s separator and assuming either of the definitions of vaporization as given by plaintiff, either that it means purely sepa- ration in the sense of segregation or that that is a 3161 necessary element of vaporization, does the defend- ant in the separator withdraw residue : after vaporiza- tion? - 1624 A. In the defendant’s vapor separator there is a foamy or frothy mass of liquid extending for a number of feet up imto the separator.; This is ° brought about by the high ‘velocity of the stream of . material entering the vapor-separator which enters very close to the bottom of the separator, and this serves to agitate and stir up this small amount of liquid in there into this foamy mass, Now if “vaporization” includes the se parating step, or if **vaporization’’ is the separating step, that. takes. place up in the vapor separator, some distance 3162 from the bottom, and the residue, however, is drawn : off from’ the bottom very near where the stream enters the separator. Now if vaporization, does not take place until you ~—~get up here in the upper portion of the separator, above the foam or froth, then it séems to me.that you would necessarily conclude that residue is withdrawn before vaporization because the residue.is withdrawn from the bottom very near the inlet. -Now that does not make sense to me but that is. what I am led to if I include the separating step as a necessary part of the vaporization or if I say that vapor ization is the | separating step. e 1102 Abstract of Testimony on Merits. In claim ‘5 of the patent as issued the phrase .‘‘af- _ fording a vaporization space above the ‘stream during the second stage of the travel.thereof-to said dis- charge point” seems a rather odd use of the word : ‘‘vaporization”’ ‘as an adjective modifying the noun 3162 3163 - *space’’. That by itself would certainly excite 1625 my curiosity, but as 1 read on in that claim, the next’ passage, he says: ‘taking off the vapors from said vapor space.’ “There he‘clears up what he means by that; ” says that is a vapor space. In these two passages, the vaporization space is the _ same as the vapor space. 3164 He says ‘‘The said vapor space”’ referring to what ~he has up above called the ‘‘vaporization space.’’ | night add to that, that words are used rather loosely in this pateut.in a number of cases. We fiid that the grammar might be corrected in places, and the spelling might be corrected. 1 don’t mean to say that’in criticism of the patent at all because I feel that this patent is perfegtly clear and uaderstandable, it is to me, but I simply mention that we do find words | used in a rather odd way in a number of places in the . patent. -If reflux is diverted out into tank L, which is the alternative method shown’ in the specification, one would probably lose some heat from the reflux and that reflux would have to be replaced by additional! harder firing of the. B tubes. It, of- course, involves _ also the use of additional apparatus and additional 3164 3165 pumping costs to get the oil, to put this heat back in because with the other operation it runs in by gravity and there is no cost attached to the return in that way. - The advantage in. returning the velins direct: to the inlet of- the heating tubes as conipared witha 1626 once-through process where the reflux might be collected in a (ank and returned ‘to the coil, on a subsequent occasion, either alone or mixed with the fresh feed, is that the immediate return of reflux: gives this advantage of heat conservation and the advantage ‘of the use of less equipment and less pumping costs. “Those are the only advantages | can see which attach to that. The idea _— advanced that this reflux being Testimony of Howard V. Smith. 1103 a cracked product is an excellent solvent for cracked 3166 3166 . 3167 or tarry materials themselves, and thereby aids in keeping these materials in solution and carrying them out of the heating coils. Now if one is charging a dirty stock to the process. | then’ the reflux being-a cleaner material ‘serves to dilute the dirty constituents of the dirty stock and helps to carry them along.- I do not think there is any doubt about that. But if on the other hand one is charging a clean stock to the process, then we have no such solution effect acting at all. That is best evidenced by the fact that one may take a clean oil stock and erack it without admixture with seek to a greater’ extent: without forming or ‘de gitin carbon than one can with that aqme fresh stock mix with its reflux. For example, one might take a gas oil and put it through a cracking operation and crack once threugh to make 30 per eent of gasoline, or-even more, even a higher percentage of yasoline, without forming or depositing carbon. Now if one takes that same gas oil and mixes 1627 it with reflux and puts it through the cracking operation, then one would develop carbon and deposit carbon in the process with that same con- version or a lower conversion to gasoline. é The thought also has been advanced that the votern of reflux in the Dubbs process serves to keép the reactive molecules separated so that the polymeriza- tion reaction is retarded and tied up with the fact — that the polymerization reaction is a second order. - ‘reaction; namely, that it involves the bringing to- gether of two or more molecules, uniting them, and that if one separates those reactive molecules by mix- ing-some other material in, then there is less chance for the reactive molecules to get tegether and to polymerize. > fe the difficulty with that as applied to this re- fluxing operation is that the materials which polymer- ize are the unsaturated matefials formed i in the erack-- - ing reaction, and the reflux itself is loaded with these unsaturated materials, these reactive materials which will polymerize. In fact reflux may be polymerized to tar at temperatures well below those at which it cracks. 1104 3167 3168 3169 - 3169 Abstract of Testimony on Merits. For example, one can take a reflux and keep it heated to a temperature of, say, 600 degrees for a period of time and polymerization will go on in that quite actively. That temperature, of course, is below the temperature at which the reflux cracks, still it would dévelop tars by being heated at that tempera- ture for a period of time. Of course at a higher -temperature, that is- getting the reflux up into 1628 the cracking temperatures, the polymerization reaction goes on at a faster rate. So that the return of reflux mixed with the fresh feed, instead of retarding this polymerization reaction actually pro- motes polymerization reaction because the reflux it- self polymerizes. ; , There is an advantage in reflux return in Dubbs in that it permits a low cracking per pass with a high yield. The basic ‘reason for returning reflux in any cracking operation is that we find we cannot convert in one cracking all of the available cracking stock into the desired products. We get gasoline, we get some gas, and we get tars and carbon, but there is always -soujeyynaterial left which is suitable for additional cragketig and which can be put back into the cracking operation to make more gasoline. And that is why reflux is returned in any of. these cracking operations, Now the same thing applies in the operation de- scribed in this patent. | “When T-come to consider this Egloff patent I find . myself in a different situation from that when I " studied the Dubbs patent, because te me the Dubbs patent teaches a useful process and a useful principle in cracking. This Eglotf patent, on the other hand, is very meager in its disclosure and I do not find in this patent where a useful process is taught. falas The objects of the patent are found on page 1, be- ginning at line 9, which reads: 1629° **This invention relates to improvements in process and apparatus for -cracking. oil, and re- .fers moré. particularly to a process in which the oil is distilled under heat and pressure, certain of the vapors subjected to reflux condensation and subjected-to fur- ther cracking,’’ - .° Now there. he identifies the type of process with which he is dealing. It is one of these pressure dis- tiation processes. °° a Ws. ~ Testimony of Howard v. Smith. — HNO05~ A pressure distillation process is a’process similar 3170 to the Burton or the Burton-Clarke process in which. -the oil is heated in a large tank or container equipped: with vapor outlets so that the vapors can escape sub- stantially as rapidly as they are formed, and in which the oil is heated, cracked and distilled, under pres- sure, the purpose of the pressure being to hold the oil ‘in a-Jiquid condition so that a cracking temperature - may be maintained on the oil. 1 have had experience with pressure distillation processes: I have had quite a few years experienc? with the Jenkins cracking process, which I mentioned yesterday, which was used extensively by the Skelly Vil Company and that is one of these pressure distilla- . _ tion types .of processes. : Returning to the patent and continuing that quota- tion there, at line 15, he states the object and says: “*the object in the present instance being to subject - the reflux condensate to different conditions of fm- -perature or pressurg or both than that to w hich@the raw oil is subjected.’ -..- hat is his first gbject and I have searched ‘this 3171 . patent through to find out what useful purpose ~ ° 3171° 1030 is attained by that ubject, and it is not stated in the patent anywhere ‘and I am unable to state any useful purpose for it myself in a pr essure dis- tillation type of cracking operation. He says, continuing: ‘* Another object of: the invention is to, ‘if desired, subject part of the apparatus to vacuum action.”’’ Quite a little of this patent is devoted to this matter ©. of subjecting part of the apparatus to vacuum action, _ but there again there is no explanation of ‘what useful — purpose is attained in subjecting: any part of the cracking apparatus to vacuum action, and I don’t know of‘any useful purpose which is attained by doing that. Those are the only objects: which are given in the patent. . . Referring now i the drawing of’ the patent and briefly tracing the cycle, I reed what the patent says about that, beginning at line 26, it says: “Referring to the drawings, 1 designates a furnace, _ .provided with combustion chambers 2 and 3, separated a by a foraminated bridge wall inside.’’ — \ ° 1106. Abstract of Testimony on’ Me site. | That would be this bridge wall which is marked 4. 3172 -+‘In the respective’ combustion chambers. are nounted the heating coils 5 and 6, eachi of which may take the form of a continuous length of several hun- dred feet.of two to 8-inch pipe. The lower coii 3 is “connected by feed line 7 to charging pump 8, leading > . to any stitable source of raw oil supply, as for exam , . ple fuel oil or heavy asphaltic crudes ‘such as Cali- fornia or Mexican crudes containing in ‘themselves: _ little gasoline, or the like.’ | Now in that he is saying that this precess could be eee used to charge'a dirty typeof stock. 3172 1631 ‘The delivery side of the coil 5 is, connected - . by transfer line 9, having throttle valve 10 and . pressure, gage 11, to the end of-an elongated. horizon- . tally disposed expansion chamber 12. This expansion chamber inay for example be 68 inches in diameter and . 40 to 60 feet long. It is loeated outside the fire zone and suitably "ttinince above the furnace by means of - supports 13," In that he says that the expansion chamber is not to - . be subjected to any external heating operation. And continuing : . | ° ‘‘The delivery side pf tke coil 6 is connected by 3173 auxiliary transfer line 14, “having throttle valve 15 and pressure gage 16 to the main transfer line 9. The. expansion chamber 12 is provided with residue draw off pipe.17, having throttle valve 18, and with a vapor outlét pipe 19, having throitle valve 20, leading to the , low er side of the dephlegmator 21.”’ - ~ . Now I might explain there that-that vapor line i is show n broken off there just te-bring the apparatus closer together. And likewise the dephlegmator is shortened up, showing a break, in that.. The actual. - de phlegmator would ‘be, was ‘intended to be higher than 4 is shown there. ‘The dephlegmator 21 is prov ided with a series of . baffle like plates 22’’, Those are inside he re. (indicating). ‘cand at its lower side is connected to reflux. return line 23, having throttle valve 24, and leading to: reflux oil pump 25 interposed in the feed line 26, leading to the sl74 ‘inlet side ‘of the heating coil 6. The upper end - the - - Testimony of Howard V. Smith. a 1107 dephlegmator is connected by vapor line 27, hav- 3174 1632 ing throttle-valve 28, to the top of condenser coil - | pipes 38 and 39, control 29, seated in condenser box 30. The lower end of the coil 29. is connécted by pipe 31, having throttle valve 32, to the upper-part of receiver 33. This re- ceiver 33 has liquid level gage 34,’’— That is the glass on the outside there. . **pressure gage 35, liquid drawoff pipe 36, controlled by valve 37. It \g also provided with two gas outlet ~ fed by throttle valves 40 and 41, respectively. The pipe 39.is connected to a vacuum pump 42,”" This explains this vacuum operation— ‘‘whereby a vacuum may be maintained on the re- ceiver, condenser, dephlegmator and @apor chamber, or on the receiver alone or receiver and condenser alone, or receiver, condenser and dephlegmator alone. _ This is accomplished by suitably regulating the varj- 8175 3176 “S176 vacuum. eus'valves shown.’’ , That is, these throttle valves on the pipes connected with the various units. og ‘“*The dephlegmator is prévitked with pressure gage 43°" ‘ . ‘ , That is up on the top there. . ‘*and the vapor chamber with pressure gage 44."’ Pressure may be regulated at various places in this apparatus. It may be regulated by the throttle valve on the gas outlet pipe of the receiver. In that event all of.the valves on the various pipes connecting the apparatus up-fo that point would be epen and the. pressure would be maintained and regulated by that. Or it might be regulated bythe valve 32, which 1633 is on the line betweep the condenser and this re- ceiver, arid in that case the valves in the lines ahead of that would be open. Or it might be regulated by valve 28 in the vapor pipe coming out of the top of ~ the dephlegmator. Or it might be regulated by valve 20 on the pipe leading from the expansion chamber to the dephlegmater. Or it might be regulated by the valves 15 and 10 in the outlets of the coils 5 and 6 so as to operate the expansion chamber and all of the subsequent equipment under a low pressnré or - 1108 3177 part of the patent, beginning at line 85, where \\. \ \ \ Abstract of Testimony on Merits. The oil cy le through there is \deseribed ‘in Ye next — t says: ‘‘The process may be carried out as follows: ‘*Fuel oil, as for example fuel ail from: the Wi ayside _ Kansas field of say\25 degrees Baunie;”’ That would be a’ topped crude, I behev re, what we now call a topped crude generally from this Kansas - production, that is a crude oil which had had: the - lighter fractions ‘distilled off ‘of it, leaving Just the heavi ier residual. fractions. ae | - Coptinning, Bais . . “‘may be heated to a ‘iaiiaeainns of say 700 degree s F., and subjected to a pressure. of say 135 pounds in the heating coil 5, and delivered in. substantially liquid ~ phase tlirough the insulated transfer line 9 ae oe. - . pansion chamber 12.’’ 3178 That temperature ‘is a condiing temperature ; that is, we generally say: that 700 degrees represen.s the low end of the cracking temperature range in. 1654 commercial operations, but that temperature brings about cracking at such a slow rate that it is not suitable for a coil cracking operation at.all. In other words, passing the oil threugh a coil'and heat- ing it only to 700 degrees would not bring about any cracking. Fo crack it’ at 700 degrees vou have to get the oi] in an apparatus where it can be held at that temperature for hours and hours. at a time, apparatus like the Burton or the Burton- Clark still, for example. He says that tite oil is delivered in subétantially . liquid phase through the. insulated transfer line 9 to . the expansion ehaniber 12. That means that the heat- ing which is accomplished in the coil is not to eause ‘the oil to. vaporize to any substantial extent. “It is rather curious,—he mentions that. transfer line.9 is insulated bat he does not say anything about the ex- pansion chamber itself. We just have “to presume. that he means to insulate ‘that too. Roe 7 Continuing :. | _. “This expansion chamber may he’ maintained under a pressure of say 135 pounds.”’ Now 135 pounds pressure is a pressure which is suitable for carrying on these presstire distillation types of operation. .The pressure distillation opera- tions have. been carried on commercially from pres- ] | « = a ‘Testimony of Howard V. Smith. - 1109 3179 sures of around 75 pounds up to, oh, several hundred - pounds, 300, 350, 400 pounds; so that a pressure of 135 pounds is a pressure which is suitable. for a a sure distilliiig operation. Confinuinrg : “‘The reflux condensate may be weaned back 3179 1635 ‘by pump 25 to the heating coil 6, and there sub- Wet to a pressure of 175 pounds and a tem- per e of say 770 degrees F. It is delivered in sub-: stantially liquid phase to the vapor chamber 12.’ Now hesays that. the reflux is to be heated to this higher temperature of 770. degrees, and it is heated under a higher pressure of, say, 175 pounds. Again, . i _ .470 degrees is a cracking temperature but it is nota . “racking tem ayognyre which is suitable for cracking oilinacoil. Itisa temperature which still requires a . long time to bring about substantial cracking and you just don’t get that long time in passing the oil through a-coil. You have to hold the oil in some container . - which will hold a lot of oil i in order to get substantial: _ cracking.- {t provides such a chamber, the large’ ‘expansion chamber is the type of thing you use for cracking at 3180 that sort of a temperature. ‘Te does not give you the . temperature in ‘the expansion. chamber. He does say.that the oil from both of these wiin is to be delivered to this expansion chamber in substan- . tially liquid phase, that is the oil is to be heated but it - is to he substantially in a liquid condition Ww hen it gets ‘ into the expansion chamber. The expansion chamber is clearly not intended to be’ heated externally, so it has to get Whatever heat it Te- ceives from the self-contained heat of the oil coming into the expansion chamber. That self-contained heat acting for a period of time, if it is high enough and if the time i is long enough, would bring about some erack- -ing of the oil, and if the eracking is sufficient 3180 1636 under the conditions prevalent there, the pres- -3181 .. sure ‘conditions, it would bring about some vaporization as the result of cracking. The cracking and vaporizing operations require some heat; that is, they absorh some heat and if any substantial amount of the cracking and vaporization takes place in there we would find the temperature decreasing i in the un- . heated tank of this sort. = a“ 1110 3182 ‘Abstract of Testimony on | Merits. These temperature and. pressure conditions ir Eg-- loff would bring about cracking in the expansion chamber if there was some means of maintaining those temperatures for an extended period of time. Of course, the mixed stream entering the expansion chamber would be at some temperature intermediate between the 770 of coil 6 and 700 of the coil 5. Just what that temperature*would be would depend upon ‘the relative amounts of the two streams. But the difficulty that we encounter in. attempting, to operate this in this way would be that in.order to get reflux to go through coil 6 you have to get vapor- ization in expansion chamber 12; and in order to get _ vaporization in expansion chamber 12 you would have to have cracking in there and that requires tempera- ture and time; and_in order to get a cracking tem- perature in there vou have to have reflux because _that stream is the one which .is heated to the higher temperature. So-that you are up against the diffi- ' culty of vetting heat to bring about the cracking, to 3182 bring about vaporization, so that you can get reflux to get heat. It works in a sort of yicious cycle there for which there doesn’t seem to be any solution. | 1637 That is true even though the expansion cham- ber be instilated, that applies i in any’case. The vaporization in the expansion chamber of Byloff is the result of atiy cracking which takes place in the - expansion chamber and the formation of the ‘light materials — would vaporize. under those condi- tions. That-is ‘the same proposition: which takes place. in 3182 the C tubes of the Dubbs patent. That is, the lighter materials formed by the. cracking, when they are formed they find themselves, under temperature and ‘pressure conditions at which they would be vapor, so they vaporize as they form. The statement of the condition in which the oil is to be delivered to the expansion chamber has a bear: ing as to what is to cause vaperization in the expan- sion chamber. I think that clearly indicates that the patentee had in mind that he was going to deliver this liquid oil into the expansion chamber and have that» liquid oil crack in the expansion chamber and form vapors as a result of the cracking. . Q. Now. disregarding the statement in the Kgloff. ; Testimony of Howard V. Smith. — 1111 "patent: that -the invention refers ‘cinta to a ‘process in which the oil is distilled: under heat and . pressure, is -there. any teaching in this ‘patent of a 3184 3185 process where the oi] is cracked in the coil?. ' A. Well, continuing with the reading of the pat- ent—' It says, line 103.on page 1: ‘It will be thus seen that the reflux condensate is continuously: subjected to a re-cracking, but at dif- ferent conditions of temperature or. pressure, or both, than that to which the raw oil is ‘subjected.’ 1638 Now it says, it is continuously subjected to : re-cracking ‘and he means that the re-cracking to take place in this:coil 6. Of course, re-cracking — means that it is a cracking following a cracking; and that-cracking which is meant there is the crack- ing which is intended to take placé in this expansion chamber. It is to crack first in the expansion cham. | | ber and then the reflux is intended to be re- cracked in | the coil, in coil 6. The Court: Q. Would there be cracking in thc expansion chamber again? A. Yes .our Honor, it would then continue to erack ‘in the expansion chamber providing the conditions suitable for cracking in there are maintained. The difficulty with this is that, while he says the oil is to be subjected to re-cracking in this eoil 6,.he does not - provide enough temperature to accomplish any sub- a amount: of cracking in the coil; just too low a Aemperature, 770 degrees would not do it. In the process. which I say Egloff teaches, there would be no advantage in-separately heating the raw oil and the condensate. I do not see where there would. he any advantage in separately heating the raw oil and the reflux in that ‘ type of operation where. the cracking is to take place in the expansion chamber, this big vessel there. _The - reflux might just as well be mixed with, the fresh charge, as in’Dubbs, and the two. heated together. | 3185 © I do not see where there would be any advantage , 1639, in heating the two separately and then mixing | * them:and “then putting them in the tank to erack. _ The patent does not give any clue as té what adv ‘an- 3186 tage is expected to be gained by that. There is a little more to this specification here 1112 Abstract. of Testimony: on Merits. which describes-his ideas about the vacuum operation, °° continuing where I left off there at line 107, he says: :‘A process may be carried out in the apparatus in the manner just above described, except that the de- - ‘phelgmator, condenser and receiver, instead of being under a pressure ‘of 135 pounds as in ‘the ‘first case, may be subjected to a vacuum through suitably regu- lating the vacuum pump, opening valve 41, closing the: valve 40, and regulating the — 20, valves 28 and 32 being also open.’’ . Again he does not give any idea as i what useful purpose would be served by: that. The specification _ does not say how much oil is ‘maintained in the eX-/ ~ pansion chamber. 3187 3187 3188 Q. Do the claims say sinythine about how. mich oil is there? ° A. Well, claim 1, take claim 1 as an “example. a says — ‘*A process of oil conversion, consisting in main- taining a body of heated hydrocarbons in an enlarged zone where substantial vaporization occurs.”’ Now obv iously the enlarged zone would be the ex- pansion 12, and maintaining a body of heuted hydro- carbons would mean maintaining a substantial amount of oil in there, I shonld say. QQ. Referring again to the specification, and had. ing in mind that teaching of the claim that the body of oil is maintained in the chamber, what have you, to say as.to the relative dimensions of the coil and chamber as being consistent or inconsistent with 1640 the teaching that it isa oe distilling opera- tion? A. Well, the size of the expansion chamber. which he gives, that is 68 inches in-diameter and 40 to 60 feet long, that of course is a pretty good sized. vessel and would hold quite a lot of oil. The coils he de- scribed as being several hundred feet of 2‘to 8-inch pipe. Well, the coil would contain a smaller amount of oil particularly if the smaller sizes of coils were used. [I do not recall ever hearing of a cracking coil being built of pipe as large as 8 inches. Generally they use the smaller sizes of pipe in a coil that is to - be used in a cracking process. : As described in this illustgation here, which is the | Testiniony of Howard y. Smith. — , Tils. “process description of the patent, ‘conditions are not | provided which would bring abott commercial yields | of gasoline. I don’t believe the word ‘ Up of the desired low boiling constituents alone, but they. also contain higher boiling constituents which should be additionally cracked in order to get maxi- mum vields.. And the higher boiling constituents have to be separated froin the lower boiling constitu- ents, and ‘that separation is carried out in this de- phelemating operation. ! 3193 ‘Testimony of Howard V. Smith, © 1115 I am familiar with. the cracking operation of de- fendant, Globe Oil & R Refining Company, as conducted at its Lemont plant. I.was present and took part in the inspection of the plant which was the basis for’ _ the stipulated operation in this case, the inspection 3195 took place in 1933.. I have had prepared a chart (DX 774A) illustrat- ing in a simplified manner the apparatus and process of the stipulated operation. DX 775 is a photograph of the Winkler-Koch plant of the Globe Oil & Refining Company at. Lemont, Illi- “nois. he These identifications that are put upon this. photo-. graph where it says ‘‘ Exchanger, vapor. separator, atmospheric distil i flash. tower”, have beet ” checked by me and are accurate. - 3196 "3196 Referring to the chart, DX 774A, I divide je the process therein illustrated as follows: There is a ‘red: line. on this‘chart which divides the process into two parts in accordance with my interpretation of the, operation, in that the part to the left of the red line ‘is the cracking operation of the process and the part to th. right of che red line constitutes the sep- 1644 arating steps and the steps for distilling the - fresh charge to prepare a suitable cracking — stock for the operation. To the left of the chart DX 774 we see isometric _ representations of the two furnaces, The upper . furnace -is called the low pressure furnace. That is 3197 used for heating the fresh cha rge, which is the topped crude oil. The lower furnace is designated a high pressure furnace and that is the furnace in which the cracking operation is carried on. a ' To the right of the furnaces. appears the vapor separator, which is a cylindrical vessel 8 feet 6 inches in diameter by'41 feet 3 inches high. On to the right of that again is the bubble tower which is also 8 feet 6 inches in diameter and it is 59 feet 7 inches high.. On to the right of the bitte tower is shown a - diagrammatic representation of the condenser for -condensing the desired light products. Actually the - condenser is madé up a‘a great many feet of pipe: submerged in water inside of a large box. Iti is merely a diagrammatic representation. 1116 Abstract of Testimony on. Merits. "Below the condenser is shown the gas separator. There‘are some other parts of the apparatus shown. on here. For. instance. the hot oil. pump is shown 3198 immediately below. the ‘bubble tower, and we have . . some other pumps here, a naphtha pump for charging. heavy naphtha and a reflux pump for regulating the _temperature in. tlie bubble tower. That particular pump that I Mave marked C, 3198 1645 on DX _774-pumps some of the condensed light ~~" products back to the ‘top of the bubble tower simply fer the purpose of regulating the temperature ‘in the bubble tower. That has nothing to do with . returning the reflux to the cracking coil, The reflux is returned to the cracking coil by the hot oil pump ” which is marked A on this drawing. I will just trace the oil cycle briefly for a moment on DX 774 starting with the charging stock for the cracking coil which is taken from the bottom of the bubble tower by the hot oil pump-marked A and de- livered to the high: pressure furnace where it passes through some 5800 feet of- pipe which is 3 inches 3199 inside diameter -by 4 inches outside -diameter, the walls of the pipe being a half inch thick. _ The cracked products leave the high pressure fur- “. nace and enter the vapor separator where the cracked —_ | tar is Separated out from the vapors and the cracked . tar is withdrawn through the line shown, leaving the bottom of the vapor separator, passing ‘out through a cooler to-a storage tank not shown, ‘through the line which is marked ‘‘Fuel Oil, 1620 barrels per day, 10.1 degrees API.’’ The vapors pass out of the top of the vapor separator through the vapor line, and this vapor. line is shown broken there because in the - actual apparatus there are some heat exchangers lo-_ . cated in that vapor line which merély serve to extract’ some heat from these vapors for aiding in the pre- liminary distillation of the crude oil. They sérve no function in the cracking operation itself. I omitted them for the sake of simplicity. 3199 1646. These vapors then enter the bubble-tower and in there they are subjected to a cooling action which causes the ‘heavier constituents of the vapor, that is the gas oil, to condense back'‘to a liquid, and - 3200 this liquid gas oil. collects at the bottom of the bubble tower to be picked up by the hot oil pump. Testimony of Howard Tv. Smith. — 1117 ‘The vapors “which are not ‘condensed i in the bubble tower and which make up the fixed, gas and the de- . sired product pass out through the. condenser. into the ‘gas separator, in which the uncondensed gas is sep-~ arated from the liquid condensate, and the gas passes out through the pipe leaving the top of the gas sep- arator through the line marked ‘‘Wet Gas 100,000 pounds per day,’’ and the desired product, the desired liquid product, is drawn off from the bottdin of the gas separator through the line which is marked - **Pressure Distillate 2224 barrels per day, 54.6 de- grees API, 1860 barrels per day gasoline content.”’ ‘ There is some additional oil fed into the cracking furnace which is introduced’ into the discharge line from the hot oil pump A. This is a heavy naphtha which is composed largely of gaso [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386404_0029%3A03. Public record. Not legal advice.