i 8 o Mr . Hatchett's Experiments on the various Alloys , 
Table XII. 
Quality of the metal. 
Unstamped pieces. 
Loss per piece. 
Stamped piecei. 
Loss per piece. 
1st 
metal. 
2d 
metal. 
Opposed. 
Mean. 
1st 
metal. 
2d 
metal. 
Opposed. 
Mea 
I. 
2. 
A. 
B. 
c. 
D. 
A. 
B. 
c. 
1st metal. 
D 
Fine gold - - 
Gold and silver 
3>*5 
>05 
1st metal. 
— 
>65 
>45 
1,70 
1st metal. 
1, 
Fine gold 
Gold and copper 
3 > 1 S 
>°5 
> 5 ° 
,05 
> 6 5 
>15 
3,20 
1st metal. 
* 
Gold and silver 
Gold, silver, and 
Gold and copper 
Gold, iron, and 
,05 
>°s 
,10 
2d metal. 
,10 
>45 
>15 
,60 
zd metal. 
* 
copper - - 
Gold and 
copper 
Gold, iron, and 
uncer. 
15.60 
.10 
2d metal. 
,0; 
>55 
2,60 
1,60 
1 st metal. 
1, 
copper 
Gold and 
copper 
Gold, silver, and 
,05 
15,60 
7.10 
5.20 
>15 
2,60 
2,50 
2d metal. 
1, 
silver 
Gold, silver, and 
copper 
Gold and 
,05 
uncer. 
2d metal. 
— 
>45 
>55 
1,60 
i. 
copper 
copper 
uncer. 
>°5 
,10 
a— 
>55 
>15 
The two first columns of this Table show the quality of the 
two metals compared. The columns A B show the loss which 
each of these metals suffered, when rubbed against metal of the 
same kind; and the two next columns show their diminution, ’ 
when rubbed against each other; the column C showing which 
metal wore the most, together with its diminution, and the 
column D showing the mean between the diminutions of the 
two metals. For example, in the first row of the Table, the two 
metals compared are fine gold and gold alloyed with silver ; and, 
when stamped pieces were employed, the diminution caused by 
rubbing the first metal against metal of the same kind was 0,65, 
and the loss of the second metal, by the same treatment, was 
0,45 ; but, when the two metals were rubbed against each other, 
the first metal was most diminished, and its loss was 1,70; 
therefore, as the second metal lost 1,40, the mean loss was 1,55. 
