Another Reason for Weak Strikes
RWB
Posts: 8,082 ✭
Two of the most commonly published reasons for weakly struck coins are “die spacing” and “reduced striking pressure.” I will leave explanations of these to others; however, there is a third cause of weakly struck coins – particularly silver dollars – that is rarely considered.
During research on the 1900-O/CC I discovered a long set of correspondence between the Philadelphia Mint and the New Orleans Mint. NO was complaining about poor quality dollar dies. They cracked easily, collapsed in the center or did not produce good looking impressions. The Philadelphia engraving department countered that NO got the same dies as everyone else and suggested they were abusing the dies. The problem had been occurring off-and-on for many years, and never corrected.
The mint director sent an engineer to NO to examine the problem. He noted many dies with significant cracks and that the designs were not well struck. He attributed the damage to excess striking pressure used in attempt to bring up the design. After some experiments, the engineer determined that a large proportion of the dollar blanks were too hard and had not been properly annealed.
His investigation showed that the annealing furnace at NO was not able to bring all the blanks to the proper temperature. This was due in large part to trying to put too many blanks through the furnace in order to meet the Mint Bureau’s production quota.
When throughput in the annealing furnace was reduced, the blanks softened properly and fully struck coins could be made without damaging the dies. After the engineer left NO, they stuck with his recommendations for a couple of months, then, under pressure to meet production demands, reverted to their old ways and the same problems reoccurred.
When examining a Morgan dollar with extensive cracks through the legends, or weakly struck pieces, consider that improper annealing of the blanks may have played a significant role.
RWB
During research on the 1900-O/CC I discovered a long set of correspondence between the Philadelphia Mint and the New Orleans Mint. NO was complaining about poor quality dollar dies. They cracked easily, collapsed in the center or did not produce good looking impressions. The Philadelphia engraving department countered that NO got the same dies as everyone else and suggested they were abusing the dies. The problem had been occurring off-and-on for many years, and never corrected.
The mint director sent an engineer to NO to examine the problem. He noted many dies with significant cracks and that the designs were not well struck. He attributed the damage to excess striking pressure used in attempt to bring up the design. After some experiments, the engineer determined that a large proportion of the dollar blanks were too hard and had not been properly annealed.
His investigation showed that the annealing furnace at NO was not able to bring all the blanks to the proper temperature. This was due in large part to trying to put too many blanks through the furnace in order to meet the Mint Bureau’s production quota.
When throughput in the annealing furnace was reduced, the blanks softened properly and fully struck coins could be made without damaging the dies. After the engineer left NO, they stuck with his recommendations for a couple of months, then, under pressure to meet production demands, reverted to their old ways and the same problems reoccurred.
When examining a Morgan dollar with extensive cracks through the legends, or weakly struck pieces, consider that improper annealing of the blanks may have played a significant role.
RWB
0
Comments
Thanks for the post!!
“We are only their care-takers,” he posed, “if we take good care of them, then centuries from now they may still be here … ”
Todd - BHNC #242
Drunner
All The Way - And Then Some
I collect Modern Commemoratives
and anything Franklin.
What line of research are you carrying out and are you (or have you) published any part of the information you have collected?
Very interesting post by the way. I look forward to reading more posts like this one.
Collecting since the 1980's
Morgan Dollars Circ. Strikes
- Basic Set - Varieties - Prooflike Basic Set - Date Set
- Carson City - Early S Mint Short Set - Mintmark Type Set
Morgan Dollars Proof
- Basic Set - Varieties
Peace Circ.
RWB
Thanks, Roger!
Check out the Southern Gold Society
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
Please keep any eye out for any documentation you might find regarding the Micro O's. For example NO employees discovered making mint products, etc.
Free Trial
Thanks for posting this information.
Jonathan
myCCset
Excellent post.
PC
Didn't wanna get me no trade
Never want to be like papa
Working for the boss every night and day
--"Happy", by the Rolling Stones (1972)
The separation caused the weak ears and breast feathers typical of N.O. dollars, while the excessive flatness of the dies caused the rims of the N.O. dollars to be exceptionally well struck. The edges of the dies were not curved away from each other as on the P & S dies.
Carson City, on the other hand, basined their dies TOO convex. The centers came together better and you get excellent strikes on the ears and breast feathers, but weak rims.
TD
<< <i>Yet another cause of weak striking particular to the New Orleans Mint is that they did not basin (grind down prior to use) their dies convex enough. This caused the centers of the opposing dies to be further apart than on the Philadelphia or San Francisco dies, which were of the correct curvature. . . . >>
Do we know what "convex enough" is or was in terms of some measurement, e.g., what was the radius of the curve (assuming that the basined die was spherical)? Also, I've come to the tentative conclusion that the convex shape of a die explains why only some central devices are doubled in cases of tilted hub doubling. And, of course, this theory makes sense only if just part of the higher elevations of the design -- the apex of the curve -- is transferred during the first pressing. Can you shed any light?
I like this place.
"Inspiration exists, but it has to find you working" Pablo Picasso
<< <i>
<< <i>Yet another cause of weak striking particular to the New Orleans Mint is that they did not basin (grind down prior to use) their dies convex enough. This caused the centers of the opposing dies to be further apart than on the Philadelphia or San Francisco dies, which were of the correct curvature. . . . >>
Do we know what "convex enough" is or was in terms of some measurement, e.g., what was the radius of the curve (assuming that the basined die was spherical)? Also, I've come to the tentative conclusion that the convex shape of a die explains why only some central devices are doubled in cases of tilted hub doubling. And, of course, this theory makes sense only if just part of the higher elevations of the design -- the apex of the curve -- is transferred during the first pressing. Can you shed any light? >>
The Mint did have a standard for the radius of the curve, but New Orleans and Carson City did not meet the standard. This is one of the visual clues that allows experienced collectors and dealers to guess the mint of origin of a Morgan dollar just by looking at tyhe obverse.
However, this feature was created after the hubbing process was completed, and has nothing to do with the central-only die doubling created by the conical shape of a die blank touching only the central part of the hub.
TD
New collectors, please educate yourself before spending money on coins; there are people who believe that using numismatic knowledge to rip the naïve is what this hobby is all about.
I have since learned that all dies did not have to be basined. After inspection, some could be used right out of the box.
We all sometimes forget that each die was created individually, and the actual squeezing imparted different surfaces to each die.
Some were a little deeper sunk, some a little more shallow. Some were at tolerance right out of the box.
The die contour, or radii, was very critical because the metal must be able to flow into all parts of the die at strike, and Basining a die that needed it aided that part of the minting process.
Hope this helps.
Pete
I work in a tooling organization, heat treating of metal can be difficult with large projects. If a large invar mandrel is not heated evenly to the same temperature, the tool can warp. It is easy to believe that attempting to anneal too many planchets at once will result in uneven distribution of heat, causing some planchets to be not fully annealed.
one last diddy
the san fran mint had the morgans perfect from 1879 to 1882...then paul camilo retired....and the loss of skill showed for the rest of the years sf struck morgans
monsterman
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
"La Vostra Nonna Ha Faccia Del Fungo"
The way the documents read, improperly softened planchets caused the New Orleans folks to increase the pressure to try to make good looking coins and meet production demand. This stressed the dies, causing cracking and die collapse. The planchets were too hard to take a consistently good impression even at increased pressure.
you see....improperly anealed planchets would make them harder and truning up the pressure would prematurely break the dies....the die maker in philly would then have to make more dies to cover the shortage and new orleans suoer would be called on the carpet for breaking his budget
how would he/you solve this problem
a) go to philly super and ask for more money to build a bigger furnace
b) turn up the pressure and break more dies thus go to philly super
c) turn down the pressure in order to stop prematuely breaking dies
***remember money in washington did not flow as freely then as it does today!!!
thus it is easy to conclude by so many weakly struck coins that the new orleans super did " c "
what the documents should of said is and what they meant to say was....they turned up the pressure to properly strike up coins.....but found they broke too many dies so they turned it down....resulting in many weakly struck coins....which is exactly what we have today...and the reason is a no brainer
monsterman
ps....i have discovered four class 2 branchmint proofs in my collecting days...all using the same logic...."if so facto"....so it works...and the pgs have agreed with me and holdered them as such....nothing like finding a dmpl coin or pl coin and paying 5k for it and upgrading it to 100k value as it pays for the hobby :-)
out of rockets ...out of bullets...switching to harsh language
This will eventually be prepared as a research article for one of the hobby publications.
Buying top quality Seated Dimes in Gem BU and Proof.
Buying great coins - monster eye appeal only.
Excellent post RWB.
Another fourth, but less frequent reason for weak strikes are planchets of insufficient thickness. But this might come under the topic of error coins.
Rob
"Those guys weren't Fathers they were...Mothers."
Generations go buy without a researcher this competant or curious delving into the materials. I'm glad I'm around at the same time Roger is.
Betts medals, colonial coins, US Mint medals, foreign coins found in early America, and other numismatic Americana
of mine , as to the problems with NO minted coins. WELL DONE!
Camelot
<< <i>Does anyone know why the basining wouldn't have been done at Philly when the dies were made? Why make the branch mints do it? >>
Two reasons. The different mints had different presses which may have had differerent basining requirements, so it was better to leave it to the people on site, and two from my understanding the dies were sent out unhardened and the final hardening was done at the mints. This hardening would leave the die face with a layer of oxidation/scale that would have to be cleaned and polished off anyway so why not combine the polishing/basining steps. Plus if the die was basined the polishing to remove the oxidation/scale might have altered the basining.
Hell, I don't need to exercise.....I get enough just pushing my luck.
Philadelphia, New Orleans and Denver (after 1906) had similar presses and all their dies were hardened and basined at Philadelphia. San Francisco had different equipment and was sent unhardened dies so that final machining and hardening could be done to match the presses. The blanks also had to be upset to match the die radius, so it was easier to let SF harden their dies and modify the blanks accordingly. The time it took to ship dies back and forth and correspond about relatively minor problems made it vital that SF have a greater degree of autonomy than the other branch mints.
In numerous documents across the 1870s through 1890s, every time Philadelphia attempted to harden the dies for SF, problems occurred at the SF mint and large amounts of coin had to be condemned.
<< <i>Philadelphia, New Orleans and Denver (after 1906) had similar presses and all their dies were hardened and basined at Philadelphia. San Francisco had different equipment and was sent unhardened dies so that final machining and hardening could be done to match the presses. >>
So what is it we see in the typical 1921-S Morgan dollar struck from severely eroded dies? Are we seeing a breakdown in the hardening process in SF as a result of them not striking dollars for 17 years or the result of production quotas and general die shortages? Currently, far more die marriages are cataloged for 21-D than 21-S, with 21-D coins showing die failure as die breaks. Were dies that could have been sent to SF instead sent to Denver to replace the frequently breaking dies, causing SF to use theirs longer? I suppose a dive into 1921 Mint correspondence would clear this up.
Keeper of the VAM Catalog • Professional Coin Imaging • Prime Number Set • World Coins in Early America • British Trade Dollars • Variety Attribution
<< <i>To expand a little on the “basining” concept. Dies were made in Philadelphia with a specific radius of curvature for each denomination. Basining ensured that this radius was the same across the die. Since the radius often changed slightly as the die was hardened, this was also intended to correct minor irregularities.
Philadelphia, New Orleans and Denver (after 1906) had similar presses and all their dies were hardened and basined at Philadelphia. San Francisco had different equipment and was sent unhardened dies so that final machining and hardening could be done to match the presses. The blanks also had to be upset to match the die radius, so it was easier to let SF harden their dies and modify the blanks accordingly. The time it took to ship dies back and forth and correspond about relatively minor problems made it vital that SF have a greater degree of autonomy than the other branch mints.
In numerous documents across the 1870s through 1890s, every time Philadelphia attempted to harden the dies for SF, problems occurred at the SF mint and large amounts of coin had to be condemned. >>
RWB, old habits die hard so I'm curious if the San Francisco Mint also carried out the proof die preparation for Ikes?
It is a bit more complicated because, supposedly, from 1973 on, Ike proof dies were chrome plated so one has to ask if a given die sent to the S-Mint was first prepared (I don't think Ike proofs have a parabolic or spherical basin but the fields probably required some attention) before chrome plating or after and thus was the chrome plating done at Philly or at the S-Mint???
Sorry to yank you into the modern era..... Rob
Questions about Ikes? Go to The IKE GROUP WEB SITE
Interesting comments about the Ikes. I was, however, referring only to the period ending approximately 1940. After the successful 1927 chrome plating experiments with dies, there were gradual changes in processes. The pace increased when Gilroy Roberts replaced John Sinnock as engraver. I don’t have any specific information on the Ike dollars, although there are several archive files on these in College Park, Philadelphia, Denver and San Bruno NARA locations.
messydesk,
In 1921 the Bureau of the Mint was under considerable pressure to covert the Pittman bullion into silver dollars so the Treasury Dept could retire bonds and issue paper silver certificates.
In late 1920 George T. Morgan, Engraver of the United States Mint at Philadelphia, was directed to produce dies for coinage of replacement silver dollars. None of the hubs or master dies for the 1878-1904 standard silver dollar design were available. These had been destroyed in May 1910 on orders from mint director A. Piatt Andrew. Morgan, now seventy-six years old, reworked his original design for the new dollar coins. The flat-relief 1921 Morgan dollars were produced from February 20 to November 17 in Philadelphia, May 5 to December 31 in Denver, and February April 21 to November 14 in San Francisco. They were struck in huge quantities approaching 1 million coins per day. Most went directly from coinage press to storage vault.
(excerpt from: Collector’s Guide to Peace Dollars 1921 – 1964, p.10; draft; publication pending.)
Under this kind of pressure, dies were probably run too long and coins not checked as carefully as in the past. Die hardening and many other factors were likely short-cut. (The coins were just going to go back into the vaults, so why waste time and material making them the best?)
Another factor is that George Morgan was the lone engraver at the Philadelphia Mint – there were no assistants from July 1919, when Sinnock resigned, until 1923 when he returned. All Morgan had to help were die sinkers and other workmen, not engraving specialists who knew coins, coining, dies, etc. in detail.
>>>My Collection