Talk:George Broad

I am reluctant to edit the contribution of someone who might know more than I do, but I would like to add what I know which is derived from a book written by metallurgist Robert Salmon Hutton, who was in Ernest Rutherford's department in Manchester and who eventually became Goldsmith Professor of Metallurgy at Cambridge. Hutton carried out an assay of the metal (aluminium) that was used to cast the statue of Anteros. I am pretty sure that the "fountain" was not cast so that might need correction.

The statue was taken down in 1925 and stored during the rebuilding of Piccadilly underground station and was damaged during the first (exuberant) New Year celebrations after its re-erection. It was taken down again and Hutton carried out his tests.

Hutton says that there was an accepted dictum at the firm of Johnson, Matthey & Co., that they had produced the metal that was used by the firm of Broad, Salmon & Co to cast the statue. The purpose of Hutton's tests was to see if it was possible to establish whether the aluminium had been produced by chemical or electrolytic means in 1892/3. Gilbert, who made the mould, remembered in 1925 that he had made the statue out of bronze, which was clearly at variance with the actual metal of the statue. Broad, Salmon & Co could find no records. Hutton concluded that he could not decide how the aluminium had been produced. The aluminium had a low sodium content, which indicated electrolytic production. But other metallurgists pointed out that sodium would have been driven off when the aluminium was melted for a second time to make the casting. Whatever, the low sodium content ensured that the corrosion rate was low.

I question the assertion here that George Broad himself made the statue (not the fountain) since it was done by the firm of Broad, Salmon & Co.

TheProfRobin (talk) 15:13, 23 August 2016 (UTC)