xt7sj38khj29 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7sj38khj29/data/mets.xml Van Tassel, Alfred J. Bluestone, Daniel W. National Research Project on Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes in Industrial Techniques (U.S.) Works Progress Administration Administrative Publications Van Tassel, Alfred J. Bluestone, Daniel W. National Research Project on Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes in Industrial Techniques (U.S.) 1939 xii, 83 pages: illustrations 26 cm. text UK holds archival copy for ASERL Collaborative Federal Depository Program libraries. Call Number: Y 3.W 89/2:56/M-2 books English Philadelphia, Pa.: Works Progress Administration, National Research Project This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed in accordance with U. S. copyright laws. Works Progress Administration Administrative Publications Brickmaking Brickmaking machinery Brick trade Mechanization in the Brick Industry, 1939 text Mechanization in the Brick Industry, 1939 1939 1939 2021 true xt7sj38khj29 section xt7sj38khj29

W O R K S P R O G R E S S A D M I N I S T R A T I 0 N

F. C. HARRINGTON CORRINGTON GILL
Administrator Assistant Administrator

NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
on

Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes
in Industrial Techniques

DAVID WEINTRAUB
Director

Studies in Equipment Changes and Industrial Techniques

George Perazich, Engineer in Charge

THE WPA NATIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT
ON REEMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND RECENT CHANGES
IN INDUSTRIAL TECHNIQUES

Under the authority granted by the President in the Execu-
tive Order which created the Works Progress Administration,
Administrator Harry L. Hopkins authorized the establishment
of a research program for the purpose of collecting and ana-
lyzing data bearing on problems of employment, unemployment,
and relief. Accordingly, the National Research Program was
established inOctoDer 1956 under the supervision of Corning ton
Gill, Assistant Administrator of the WPA, who appointed the
directors of the individual studies or projects.

The Project on Reemployment Opportunities and Recent Changes
in Industrial Techniques was organized in December 1935 to
inquire, with the cooperation of industry, labor, and govern-
mental and private agencies, into the extent of recent changes
in industrial techniques and to eValuate the effects of these
changes on the volume of employment and unemployment. David
Veintraub and Irving Kaplan, members of the research staff
of the Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance, were ap—
pointed. respectively, Director and Associate Director of the
Project. The task set for them was to assemble and organize
the existing data which bear on the problem and to augment
these data by field surveys and analyses.

To this end, many governmental agencies which are the col-
lectors and repositories of pertinent information were in-
vited to cooperate. The cooperating agencies of the United
States Government include the Department of Agriculture, the
Bureau of Mines of the Department of the Interior, the Bureau
of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor, the Railroad
Retirement Board, the Social Security Board. the Bureau of
Internal Revenue of the Department of the Treasury, the De-
partment of Commerce, the Federal Trade Commission, and the
Tariff Commission.

The following priVate agencies Joined with the National
Research Project in conducting special studies: the Indus-
trial Research Department of the University of Pennsylvania,
the National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., the Employ-
ment Stabilization Research Institute of the University of
Minnesota, and the Agricultural Economics Departments in the
Agricultural Experiment Stations of California, Illinois,
Iowa, and New York.

WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION

WALKER-JOHNSON BUILDING
1734 NEW YORK AVENUE NW.
WASHINGTON. D. C.

F. C. HARRINGTON

ADMINISTRATOR

June 6, 1939

Colonel F. C. Harrington
Works Progress Administrator

Sir:

The report Mechanization in the Brick Industry,
transmitted herewith, describes the changes in produc—
tion techniques that the industry has experienced in
the past so years. The changes of the last 20 years
are analyzed in some detail.

Although the improvements in machines and in
manufacturing techniques were limited largely to
refinements in design and to the addition of rela—
tively inexpensive auxiliary equipment, the cumulative
effect of these minor changes on the amount of labor
required per unit of product was considerable. In
addition, the industry has benefited from the general
technological progress since 1920 which resulted
in the use of more wear—resistant metals and ball
and roller bearings in brick—making machinery, in
widespread electrification, and in the mechanization
of clay—pit operations.

From the standpoint of the industry's capital
outlaysJ it is notable that during the early and
middle 1920's equipment purchases were made in the
expectation of stable or increased demand and were
concentrated on major production units. After the
peak of production was passed in 1925, and particu—
larly after 1929, the emphasis gradually shifted from
increasing output to reducing production costs or to
improving quality. In recent years the objective
has been to accomplish these results without major
capital investments, and the industry's equipment
purchases have therefore centered mainly on devices
that required small capital outlays relative to the
economies which they made possible.

Much of the economy in labor utilization could
not, however, be realized during the past 10 years
because of the extremely low level of capacity at

which the industry has been operating; in fact, the
output per man—hour was actually lower in i935 than
in 1929. An upturn in the demand for brick is there—
fore bound to result in an appreciable increase of
labor productivity and to reduce the amount of labor
required to produce 1,000 common brick to much less
than the 9 hours needed in 1925, the year of the last
production peak.

During the last two decades brick manufacturing
has also experienced a considerable concentration of
production in a progressively declining number of
plants. The technological base for this concentration
was provided by the availability of equipment which
can be used most economically in the larger establish—
ments and under conditions of fairly continuous
operation. The present low level of operations
relative to the capacity of the brick—manufacturing
plants is furnishing an important stimulus to further
consolidation. In the past such concentration of
production has often been the result of mergers of a
number of plants in a given region, the shutting down
of the least efficient plants, and the operation of
only the more efficient establishments. Should the
same procedure be followed in the future, the general
level of productivity of labor is bound to be raised
with little or no expenditures on machinery and
equipment to help offset the reductions in labor
requirements in the manufacture of brick.

Respectfully yours,
,’?::f:::.1‘. 7“ z<£%‘;¢,(
’7‘”

Corrington Gill
Assistant Administrator

CONTENTS

Chapter
PREFACE.....................
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND PRIOR TO 1920. . . . . . . .
III. MECHANIZATION AND PRODUCTIVITY SINCE 1920. . . . .
Production and productivity. . . . . . . . . . .
Source ofdata on rates and types ofmechanization
Clay pit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Excavation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Clay preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Machine house. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Drying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Artificial drying. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Handling in the drying process . . . . . . . .
Fuel economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Auxiliary equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Burning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Types of kiln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Auxiliary equipment. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Type of fuel used. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Unloading of kilns and transportation. . . .
Power. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
IV. SUMMARY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix
DESCRIPTION OF SURVEY DATA . . . . . . . . . . . .
NRP machinery—manufacturers survey . . . . . . .
Clay—working equipment companies . . . . . . .
Crushing and grinding equipment. . . ._. . .
Stiff—mud and soft—mud equipment . . . . . .
New machinery and repairs. . . . . . . . . .
Excavating—equipment companies . . . . . . . .
NRP—NBER 1936 brick—plant survey . . . . . . . .
Brick and clay record 1927 brick—plant survey. .
BLS 1922 brick-plant survey. . . . . . . . . . .
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General and historical. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Clay pit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Clay preparation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Machine house . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Drying. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Burning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12
14
16

16
22

25
28
4O

4O
41
42
44

45
51
54

56
59

69
69
69

71
74
75
75
77

77
77

78
79
79
80
80
80

H viii CONTENTS

1 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY—Continued Page
Fans. . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 i
Fuel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 5
Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 5
Kilns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 g
Stokers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 j
Unloading of kilns and transportation . . . . . . . . 82 1
Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 }

CHARTS AND ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure

1. Production and output per wage earner in the

brick and tile industry, 1869—1935 . . . . . . . . 6
2. Value of total production and of sales of clay—
working equipment by eight companies, 1921—35. . . 14

3. Index of value of sales of pOWer shovels and
locomotive cranes to the clay—working industries,

1920—36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
4. Mechanical excavating and loading in the clay pit. . 22
5. Clay preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

6. Indexes of value of sales of crushing and grinding

equipment to the clay-working industries, 1920—86 27
7. Machine house. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3O 3
8. Automatic soft—mud molding machine . . . . . . . . . 31 ‘

9. Indexes of value of sales of selected types of
equipment to stiff—mud brick plants, 1920—36 . . . 34

10. Percentage distribution of value of sales
of selected types of equipment to stiff-mud
brick plants, 1920—36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

11. Pugmill, auger, and cutter . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

12. Indexes of value of sales of stiff—mud and soft—mud

\ equipment, 1921—36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
3; 13. Drying in a soft-mud plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
‘; 14. Continuous system of rectangular kilns . . . . . . . 46
‘3 15. Continuous minter system of beehive kilns. . . . . . 47
ii 16. Setting brick in a rectangular kiln. . . . . . . . . 52
£3 17. Mechanical transportation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
:5 18. Effect of electrification. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
‘ TEXT TABLES

Table

1. Production, wage earners, and output per wage earner

3 in the brick and tile industry, 1869-1935. . . . . 5
2. Instances of the effects of mechanical loading on g
labor requirements in the clay pit . . . . . . . . 17

3. Proportion of brick and tile plants using mechanical a
loading equipment, 1922, 1927, and 1936. . . . . . 18

CONTENTS
TEXT TABLES—Continued

Table Page

4. Distribution of power shovels used in clay pits,

by kind of power, 1922. 1927, and 1936 . . . . . . 19

5. Number of plants using power shovels, by capacity

of dipper, 1927 and 1936 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6. Proportion of brick and tile plants using

animal power for hauling from the clay pit,

1922, 1927, and 1936 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
7. Proportion of brick and tile plants using only cable
haulage from the clay pit, 1922, 1927, and 1936. . 23

8. Clay—pit costs per thousand brick, by capacity

of plant, 1927 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
9. Distribution of brick and tile plants, by type of

fuel used and product, 1926. . . . . . . . . . . . 54
10. Total horsepower of the clay products (other than

pottery) and nonclay refractories industry, by

source of power, 1919—29 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
11. Average rated horsepower ofprime movers and electric

motors in the clay products (other than pottery)

and nonclay refractories industry, 1919—29 . . . . 61

APPENDIX TABLES

A—1. Value of total production and of sales sample of

clay-working equipment, 1919—36. . . . . . . . . . 7O
A—2. Relative value of sales of clay—working equipment

to the brick and tile industry by varying numbers

of companies, 1920—36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
A—3. Value of crushing and grinding equipment sold to the

brick and tile industryby’seven companies, 1920—36 72
A—4. Value of sales by five companies of selected types

of equipment used principally in stiff—mud

brick plants, 1920-36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
A—5. Indexes of value of sales of stiff~mud and soft—mud
equipment by five companies, 1921—36 . . . . . . . 73

A—6. Value of sales of new machinery and repairs sold to

the brick and tile industry by three companies,

1922—36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
A-7. Value of total production and of sales by three

companies of power shovels and locomotive cranes,
1919—36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

PREFACE

Not only do technological changes exert an effect on employ—
ment conditions and on the investment of capital, but they are
themselves affected by the sphere of economic relationships
within which they occur. An analysis of the industrial appli—
cations of the principles of science and engineering must
therefore also embrace the economics of their application and
the economic conditions that affect their introduction. With
this as an approach, the National Research Project hasconducted
a series of studies on types and rates of technological change.

Some of these studies centered on individual types of tech—
nological advance that affect many industries.1 One deals with
the growth of industrial research in the United States since
the World War.2 In others, an individual industry was selected
as the unit of investigation, and the subject for study was the
relationship of the economic requirements of the industry to
the development and introduction of a variety of machines and
production techniques. The present report is an example of
this last type of study. Dealing with the brick—manufacturing
industry, it is also a companion piece to the Project's broader
study of production, productivity, and employment in the brick
and tile industry3 and presents a detailed picture of the
mechanical improvements that were associated with the changes
in productivity recorded in that volume.

The report was prepared by Alfred J. Van Tassel and David W.
Bluestone. The field data used in this report were collected
in cooperation with the National Bureau of Economic Research
as part of the cooperative study on productivity and employment
in the brick and tile industry. The series of "Studies in
Equipment Changes and Industrial Techniques” are under the
supervision of George Perazich. J. Van Horn Whipple organized
the field work and supervised the editing of the materials
collected. The completed manuscript was edited and prepared
for publication under the supervision of Edmund J. Stone.

1See. for example, the report by George Perazich and Others, Industrial Instruments
and changing Technology (WPA National Research Project, Report No. H—l, Oct. 1938).

2Report DON in preparation by George Perazich.

5hiriam E. West, Productivity and Employment in Selected ndus tries: Brick and
Tale (WPA National Research Project in cooperation with Natl nal Bureau of Economic
Research, Report No. N-z, Feb. 1959).

PREFACE

We appreciate the cooperation of the machinery manufacturers
who provided our field workers with records on which most of
the data presented in this report are based. James P. Martin,
Vice President of the Lancaster Iron Works, Inc.; W. E. Cramer,
President of the Harrop Ceramic Service Company; and M. E.
Holmes, Dean of the New York State College of Ceramics at
Alfred University reviewed the manuscript and made suggestions
for its improvement. The National Research Project is of
course alone responsible for the content of the report and the
conclusions reached.

DAVID WEINTRAUB

PHILADELPHIA
June 5, 1939

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The brick—manufacturing industry is decentralized in a large
number of relatively small plants serving geographically
limited markets. In the last boom year of the industry, 1925,
more than 1,500 establishments produced an average output
of only $117,500 each.1 The most important reason for the
decentralization of the industry is the low value of both the
raw materials and the final product in relation to its bulk,
which makes nearness to raw materials and markets the principal
consideration in the location of a plant.2

Because transportation costs are high in relation to the unit
value of the product, the geographical areas of competition are
sharply limited, usually to metropolitan markets. Within these
metropolitan areas plants operate on a rather highly mechanized
level. For that large section of the industry which serves the
smaller local markets productivity and the level of mechaniza—
tion in individual plants are generally lower and vary widely.

The level of productivity of labor is, of course, determined
primarily by the degree of mechanization of production if the
extent of utilization of capacity is specified. Changes in
the man—hour requirements per unit of production and in the
total employment opportunities afforded by the brick industry
during the past quarter of a century were examined in a study
by Miriam E. West.3 The present report is concerned primarily
with the types of mechanization that have affected the level
of labor productivity.4

Unit labor requirements are, however, only one factor affect—
ing employment opportunities. In Miss West's report the
problem of employment opportunities in the brick industry is

lBaSnnial Census of Manufactures: 1925 (U. 8. Dept. C0m.. Bur. Census. 1928)
D. 68.

zfile Clay Products Industry: Plant Location Factors (New York: Metropolitan Life
Insurance Company, Policyholdersl Service Bureau, 1931), pp. 1-19.

3 . . . . .

Miriam E‘ WESE. Productivity and Employment in Selected Industries: Brick
and Tile (HPA National Research Project in cooperation with National Bureau of
Economic Research, Report No. N-2. Feb. 1939).

4 ,

It has not been possible to consider such nonmechanical factors as payment
systems, working conditions, and other managerial devices which frequently affect
the organization of the factors of production and their productivity.

2 MECHANIZATION IN THE BRICK INDUSTRY

studied in its economic context, and the influence of produc—
tion, market conditions, prices, and the financial structure of
the industry, as well as other factors, is considered. Account
is there taken of the employment afforded by the manufacture of
fuel and machinery used in brick and tile production and by the
transportation and distribution of brick.

The primary purpose of the present study is to throw light on
the types and rates of mechanization which took place in the
brick—manufacturing industry in recent years. An attempt will
be made to answer the following questions: What machines or
techniques have been principally responsible for reductions in
unit labor requirements? How rapidly have the newer and more
advanced machines and techniques been introduced? What types
of machines and techniques have been replaced by more advanced
alternatives? In particular operations and instances, what has
been the magnitude of the reduction in unit labor requirements
as the result of the introduction of newer equipment or tech—
niques, and how large were the reductions in such production
costs as labor, fuel, and power? What has been the relative
rate of mechanization in the several departments of production?
How has the rate of introduction of new equipment varied with

1‘ fluctuations in the prosperity of the industry? What has been

i the major objective of equipment purchases at various stages of

the economic cycle, that is, was the primary purpose to reduce

H; production costs, to improve the quality of the product, or to
‘ expand the output of the plant?

Three major processes are employed in the production of
common brick in the United States: the stiff—mud process,
which accounts for about half the total production; the soft-
hf mud process, which accounts for about 40 percent; and the
‘ﬁi dry—clay method.5 These three processes are distinguished
l from each other by the method of shaping the brick. In the
stiff—mud process the clay is forced out through a die in a i

continuous column which is then cut into proper lengths; in the
soft—mud process the highly plastic clay is shaped in separate
molds; in the dry—clay process dry clay is formed into brick
and tile by being subjected to high pressure in individual
331 molds: Only the first two methods will be discussed in this
i} report. The dry—clay process is used for only a very small

William F. Kirk, Productivity Costs in Common-Brick Industry (U. S. Dept. Labor,
Bur. Labor statistics Bull. No. 356. 1924), p. 9. ;

INTRODUCTION

proportion of common—brick production, and the data available
are insufficient to permit analysis.

In both methods under consideration the first step is the
excavation of the raw material, clay or shale, which is dug or,
occasionally, mined or dredged. The next step is the grinding
or crushing of it to suitable fineness. After it is rendered
homogeneous by mixing, water is added. The clay is then ready
for shaping. When this has been done, the brick are dried
either in the open air or in heated drying sheds. They are
then removed to the kiln, set, and burned at high temperature.
After cooling, they are taken from the kiln either for storage
or for shipment.

The first part of this report will deal with the technology
of the brick industry prior to 1920. The remainder will cover
the technical developments in the several departments of brick

production after 1920.6

6m general, the analysis in this report refers to Miss West's definition or the
brick and tile industry (production or common brick, face brick, vitrified brick,
hollow building tile, and drain tile). The discussion or specific technological
changes refers to brick-making machinery, but tile-making machinery is similar
in nature.

CHAPTER II

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND PRIOR TO 1920

Table 1 and figure 1 summarize the development of the brick
and tile industry in the United States and give an indication
of the rate at which mechanization proceeded. Physical pro—
duction increased more than 50 percent per decade from 1869 to
1909 but declined to 1921 and again after 1925. Output per
wage earner rose about 20 percent per decade from 1869 until
the peak of production in 1909 and then remained nearly level
until about 1920. Data for the ”Clay products (other than
pottery) and nonclay refractories“ industry, an industrial
category somewhat more inclusive than that here designated as
the brick and tile industry,1 show an almOSt fourfold increase
in installed horsepower per wage earner between 1889 and 1919.

These are the general indexes against which the more detailed
discussion of mechanization will be traced:- the industry
served a constantly expanding market until 1909; the pro—
ductivity of labor in the industry also rose continually;
and the rate of introduction of pOWer machinery was rapid
and sustained, continuing even after 1909 when production
was declining.

In the years preceding the Civil War the production process
differed but little from the methods used since earliest
historical times. Brickmaking was largely an outdoor occu—
pation and brickyards usually operated only in the summer
months. Hand methods were employed in the digging, tempering,
and molding of the clay. Drying was done in the open air and-
kilns were constructed for each individual burning. Frequently
the production of brick was carried on at the building site,
the clay from the excavation being used as the raw material.2

1The value or the five products whose manufacture is here assumed to represent the
production or all brick and tile products comprised a decreasing proportion of
the value or all products or the "clay products (other than pottery) and nonclay
refractories" industry in the period 1919-35, varying from 58 percent in 1919
to 28 percent in 1933 (based on Census of Manufactures). Nonclay refractories.
however, make up a considerable and increasing part of the value of products of
the "clay products (other than pottery) and nonclay refractories" industry
(see appendix, ftn. 6). The five products therefore represent a larger portion of
brick and tile manufacture than is indicated by the percentages above.

Zhenry C. Kleymeyer, "sort Mud Brick - some Reminiscences," Brick and Clay Record,
Vol. 66, No. 4 (Apr. 1935), 134, 136.

\- ~q w»

©Vr1w

r—ug ”-

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Brickyards, as opposed to brick plants, were the characteristic
production units.

Mechanization began with the clay—tempering or mixing oper—
ation. Formerly clay had been prepared in a "soak heap",
the temperer mixing the wetted clay with a hoe. The pugmill
operated by horse power, which eliminated this labor, held the
clay in a wooden tub while rotating knives mixed or pugged
the clay. The tempered clay was then thrust out of the pugmill
in the condition required for molding.

Table 1.- PRODUCTION, WAGE EARNERS, AND OUTPUT PER WAGE EARNEB
IN THE BRICK AND TILE INDUSTRY, 1869-1986a

Production Output per

(millions of Average wage earner

Year common—brick number of (thousands of

equivalents)b wage earners common—brick

equivalents)c
1869 3,012 30,347 99
1879 4,505 40.592 111
1889 10.009 65.020 154
1899 10.603 65,822 161
1904 12,948 70,246 184
1909 15.738 76,298 206
1914 13,098 63,189 207
1919 9,155 46,549 197
1921 8,752 41,361 212
1923 14,275 58,981 242
1925 15.388 58,050 265
1927 14.708 54,721 269
1929 12,581 47,771 263
1931 5.429 25.934 209
1933 2,085 11,165 182
1935 3.426 17.466 196

aAs used in this table, "brick and tile'I includes only five types of product:
common brick, race brick, vitrified brick, hollow building tile, and drain tile.
This classification is not used in other tables since a correspondingly precise
breakrdown or data is not possible. Data are from Miriam E. west, Productivity and
Employment tn Selected Industries: Brick and file (WPA National Research Project

iIQISSfODeI‘azCSiOn with National Bureau of Economic Research, Report NO. N-2, Feb.
1 D. .

"Common-brick equivalents" is a unit or output, the concept or which is outlined
in Miss West's study. In order to convert the production or a variety or clay
Droducts to a common measuring unit, the quantity or these products is expressed

g? :3; number or common brick which could be produced by the same expenditure
or.

c
Production divided by number of wage earners.

MECHANIZATION IN THE BRICK INDUSTRY

Figure 1.- PRODUCTION AND OUTPUT PER WAGE EARNER IN THE
BRICK AND TILE INDUSTRY, 1869-1935

BILLIONS OF COMMON-BRICK THOUSANDS OF COMMON-BRICK
EQUIVALENTS EQUIVALENTS
20.0

PRODUCTION

IO 0
9.0
8.0

7.0

5.0

4.0

3.0

OUTPUT PER
2, WAGE EARNER

-"F'

L0 100
.9 . 90
so

.8
$69 '79 ’39 ‘99 |909 ‘I9 '29 '35

Based on table 1 IPA-National Research Project
M-13

Mechanization of the tempering operation, however, was
scarcely a revolutionary change in the production process.
The first important impetus to thoroughgoing mechanization came
with the introduction of a successful brick—molding machine.
A soft—mud molding machine had been introduced in 1833,3 but
was immediately destroyed by the workers who saw in it a threat
to their livelihood. This machine again found use in 1840,
but not to any great extent. The predominance of hand molding
, was not seriously threatened until 1857, when a successful
soft—mud molding machine was designed by Martin. This was
followed in 18624 by Chamber's stiff—mud auger machine, which
represented a fundamental change in design. Instead of using

sEllis LoveJoy and H. E. Henderson, "Early Brickmaking and some Old Brick Buildings
in Virginia," Clay worker, Vol. 94. No. 1 (July 1930), 19-23.

4Ellis LoveJoy, IBrick,n Enc cloﬁaedia Britannica (14th ed.; New York: Encyclo-
paedia Britannica, Inc.. 1956 , vol. 4, pp. 111'7.

ct
13

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 7

separate molds, this machine extruded a continuous ribbon
of clay through a die and required an accessory cutting table
on which the column of clay was cut into bricks of the desired
length. This machine, employing steam power, was capable of
producing 100,000 bricks per day.

Thus, by the end of the Civil War the stage was set for the
development of a mechanized brick industry. The major mixing
and forming equipment, pugmills and brick—molding machines,
were being introduced. Powerful steam engines, which had
revolutionized production techniques in other fields by allow~
ing the concentration of power machinery, began to find more
extensive use; so did bucket elevators and other conveying
devices used to handle the increasing volumes of raw material
and finished product. The period of open-air production in
brickyards was drawing to a close.

With the westward expansion of the country and the consequent
need for construction materials, brick plants also had to
be built in the new country in order to avoid exorbitant
transportation costs. Chamber's stiff—mud auger machine,
capable of a high volume of production, found increasing favor
in the new plants in the Midwestern States. In order to break
down the harder raw materials which were available in the new
areas, more preliminary grinding equipment, such as crushers,
grinders, and disintegrators, had to be employed.

Increased demand for brick was followed quickly by increased
investment in the industry and expanded production. Heated
drier sheds began to replace the traditional open-air method
in order to decrease the time of drying. Attention was being
given to kiln design in an effort to reduce fuel costs, and
downdraft and continuous kilns were introduced. Where clay
suitable for the soft—mud process was available, mold—filling
machines began to come into general use.

The decade from 1879 to 1889 witnessed the most rapid in—
crease in production in the history of the industry. Produc—
tion more than doubled and by 1889 had reached a level higher
than that which prevailed in the years around 1920. In the
following decade, from 1889 to 1899, production increased by
only 6 percent, but the most rapid rate of introduction of
mechanical improvements and power in the industry's history is
indicated. Data for the clay—products industries show that
the installed horsepower nearly doubled from 1889 to 1899,

8 MECHANIZATION IN THE BRICK INDUSTRY %

a period in which horsepower per wage earner increased from
1.07 to 2.39. It appears, then, that in this decade the
industry consolidated its previous production gains by a more
complete mechanization of the manufacturing process. Certainly
the period witnessed a marked increase in the use of mechanical
equipment in brick plants.

The operations in the clay pit that had formerly been per—
formed entirely by men using picks, shovels, and wheelbarrows
began to be mechanized. Drills and blasting materials in—
creased the productivity of labor in the clay pit, and horse-
drawn cars on rails replaced wheelbarrows in transportation
to the mill. In a few instances steam shovels and cable and
locomotive haulage were introduced at these operations