Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1950 Annual Weather Report For 1949
1950 Annual Weather Report For 1949
January ...
February ...
March . ...
April .
...
May ... ...
June ... ...
July ... ...
August ...
September .
October ...
November .
December ...
3.05
6.59
2.22
3.90
0.49
0.56
0.10
0.21
2.45
4.72
6.53
5.79
1949.
AggrePer cent.
No.
gate
of
of
from 1st average
rain
January aggregate. days.
3.05
9.64
11.80
15.76
16.25
16.81
16.91
17.12
19.57
24.29
30.82
36.61
79.8
112.6
86.5
96.7
87.6
82.2
77.7
74.6
78. G
86.2
95.1
100.2
10
12
10
5
3
4
1
5
12
18
18
17
df
-Average
rainfall
per rain
day in ins.
Total
for
month
in ins.
0.305
0.549
0.222
0.780
0.163
0.140
0.100
0.042
0.204
0.262
0.363
0.341
3.79
4.82
5.02
2.64
2.18
1.84
1.27
1.15
1.97
3.33
4.32
4.20
--
--
36.61
100.2
115
0.318
Mean
Aggregate
from 1st
January.
No.
of
Average
rain
rainfall
days. per day.
Per
Average
cent. of rainfall
wet
per rain
days.
day.
Temperatures.
Atmospheric Conditions.
1949.
1928.1949 inclusive.
Plus or
Maxi- Miniminus Daily
mum. mum. Mean. average. range.
Maximum.
MiniDaily
mum. Mean, range
13.1
14.5
15.0
17.0
21.4'
20.0
24.0
19.9
18.1
6.6
14.2
14.0
81.2
81.7
80.2
78.3
76.0
72.8
72.2
, 73.4
74.6
76.1
78.1
80.3
67.1
67.3
65.7
62.1
56.9
52.7
51.7
63.9
57.1
60.8
63.3
65.6
74.1
74.5
73.0
70.2
66.4
62.7
61.9
63.7
65.9
68.4
70.7
73.0
14.1
14.4
14.5
16.2
19.1
20.1
20.5
19.5
17.5
15.3
14.8
14.7
77.f
60 . 4
68.7
16.7
January .
February..
March . .
April
.
May.. ..
June
.
July.. . .
August
September.
October . .
November.
December.
82.1
80.4
80.3
79.6
76.9
74.0
74.3
74.3
76.9
75.3
77.3
80.5
69.0
65.9
65.3
62.6
55.5
51.0
50.3
54.4
68.8
60.7
63.1
66.5
--
Means..
77.7
60.5
69.1
+0.4
18.6
. .
. .
..
75.i
73.2
72.8
71.1
66.2
64.0
62.3
64.3
67.8
68.0
70.2
73.5
+1.1
-1.4
-0.2
f 1.0
-0.3
+1.3
t0.4
t0.7
+2.0
-0.4
-0.5
-1-0.5
- --
Rainfall
in
inchrs.
Per cent.
of
present
mean.
Number
of ram
days.
Average
fall per
rain day.
Mean
shade
temperature,
.
.
Average
rainfall
for 1049
in inches.
Average
for years
1029-1949
inclusive
in inches.
35.98
40.78
83.2
40.35
39.61
101.9
49.39
43.35
42.34
40.91
116.6
106.0
Means
36.53
100.00
117
0.312
68.7
Experiment Station,
South African Sugar Association,
Mount Edgecornbe.
February, 1950.
The VICE-PRESIDENT
explained that he had talten
the chair in order to give the President, who was
the senior author of the paper, the opportunity of
reading it. Dr. Dodds had been the senior author
of this Annual Summary from the time it was started
24 years ago, with the exception of one year; but,
owing to his retirement in the near future, this was
the last time he would be connected with its compilation.
Mr. RAULTenquired if any member present could
give his factory experience of NCo.310 during the
past year. His company had had expectations of
very high sucrose content in this variety, but these
hopes had not been realised from the small quantity
crushed. The sucrose content of this variety was
only slightly better than that of Co.281.
Dr. DODDSconsidered that the amount of N:Co.310
that had as yet been crushed was too small to give
very representative information. Within the next
year or two, however, large quantities would be
milled. He thought that NCo.310 would not have
justice done to it as regards sucrose content as long
as this was calculated from the mean Java Ratio.
This Ratio would be lowered by the milling of canes
of much higher fibre content than N:Co.310, to the
advantage of such canes and the disadvantage of
N:Co.310.'
The VICE-PREISDENT
stated that while factories
had reported low sucrose figures for N:Co.310, on
the average it was not really lower than Co.281 in
sucrose content.
Tests at the Experiment Station indicated a
comparative sucrose content higher than that shown
in the factories for 'N:Co.310. While it was to be
hoped that in the case of this variety an increase in
sucrose cdntellt could be expected when larger
quantities were milled, one should not be too
optimistic. In the case of other varieties, tests a t
the Experiment Station had pointed to a general
increase in sucrose content when they were released,
but this increase had not eventuated.
The VICE-PRESIDENT,
referring to Mr. Rault's
remark about the useful reports contributed by
factory chemists in the past, said that only a few
went to the trouble to send them in year after year.
Mr. MCKENNA
stated that the variety that gave If others had also done this, the procedure would
most trouble in his factory last year was Co.310, have been continued with advantage.
which on occasion gave very cloudy juices.
As it had been suggested that the Annual Summary
be prepared in future by the Sugar Milling
Mr. PHIPSONasked if anyone had found that the
trash adhering to NCo.310 was difficult to remove Research Institute, he asked Dr. Douwes-Dekker
if he would indicate something of his plans for the
from the stalk.
future in this connection.
The VICE-PRESIDENT
said he had found at the
DOUWES-DEKKER
thought he would continue'
Experiment Station, that if no attempt were made theDr.Annual
summary
on the
lines as the
to trash it. N:Co.310 would have far more trash ~
~station had~ done so admirably
~
in~the
adhering to it than would, say, Co.281. However, past.
this trash was very easily removed, the leaves were
big, and when dead, did not adhere closely as in the
With regard to equipment, it was certainly the
case of canes such as Uba, for example.
intention of his Research Committee to send out a
35
qt~estionaireto the factories, as he wished to cornpile data on the plant in use in Natal. Such information would be very useful when questions were
asked about equipment.
The VICE-PRESIDENT
said that of the pi-ogress
made by the, industry since the establishment of the
Experiment Station, it would be difficult to assess
how much had been due to the compilation of the
Annual Summary. The mere fact of its giving a
comDarison between factories had nb doubt stimulate4 a lot of improvement.