severe vibration doubling

State Q

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that more indicative of a die used past the time it should have been pulled from use?

 

you are correct and I have one just like yours that I kept . this is actually from die detoration , i suppose we could say vibration helped wear out the coin dies

 

Rascal, you are confusing me. You said "you are correct" which I interpreted as meaning that I, Kasia, was correct, since I said to correct me if I'm wrong. Then you said that "I have one just like yours that I kept" which seems to me you are saying that the quarter listed was mine???? Anyways, I need more edumacation from you, so please clarify.... Am I correct that it is die deterioration from use and that you have one like the OPs coin???

 

Sorry about that Kasia . I had my bifocals off and it looked like awordcreated had made that statement. this newer forum is a little confusing. I thought I was responding to the OP .

 

ok.

 

I'll stand ground on this for now. I would expect wear to appear all over the die and 'die deterioration' to be somewhat uniform across the die. This is localized, but I admit you both were at the disadvantage of not seeing the entire coin so I will get right on that. No intent to mislead, never imagined it could go south.

 

Definitely severe die deterioration doubling. MD would only show on one side of the letters...this anomaly shows on both sides.

 

MD. I hate that Acronym. Which version do you allude to?

 

Mechanical doubling would only show on one side.

 

Actually, die fatigue due to excessive use does tend to be localized, in many cases, to some extent on the letters or areas near the rims. And the spreading can be seen on both sides of the letters there, and seem to spread more towards the rims. Which makes it 'uneven' in it's spreading. So, no, it should not neccessarily be somewhat uniform over the die. What is happening, although I am not an expert, is that the metal is becoming fatigued as well as possibly having issues with # of strikes. If the die is not perfectly aligned for each and every strike in it's life (and beyond, since the mints tend to overuse them) then the pressure will not be even. Also the metal in a die is not uniform and in the process of making the die, the stresses will not flow evenly throughout the die or even be consistent on every part of the die. You would probably have to have a huge background in metallurgy or some related field where it is applicable to understand metal fatigue, but when metal is fatigued to the point of either breaking or near breaking, it is not usually some uniform nice pattern from what I can understand of it.

 

Perhaps you can chat with the guys at this place: http://www.lincolncentresource.com/sitebuilder/images/machine_doubling_4-325x241.jpg

http://www.lincolncentresource.com/sitebuilder/images/machine_doubling_12-320x237.jpg

because they call it machine doubling in those images and it is on both sides. So perhaps there is some better way to discriminate?

And over on the motto at the other edge of the reverse it seems to be in only one direction. What do we call that?

 

Well gee, I'm not really seeing the spread in OPPOSITE directions in those photos of the 1972. I'm seeing it in generally the same directions. I would agree with Kasia's explanation as well. Your coin just doesn't have "step-down" type doubling that you would see with mechanical doubling. It shows flow lines, which indicate severe die deterioration.

 

Last time around you said sides. Look at the seven in each of those photos. And to step down on 2 sides requires vibration in two directions. How do you explain the disparity on the motto? That is easily the result of how vibration commonly affects only some areas.

 

mechanical doubling is the same as strike doubling and is attributable to the process during the coining of the coin, as opposed to a result of what the die is actually coining onto the planchet. MD is a result of bounce or vibration introduced into the process whereby the die as it strikes the coin is either in a vibration or 'bounces' (skims) the coin, so that it essentially is kind of doing a double strike to some extent, although it is done in one strike. Think of it this way. If you are hitting something to put an impression in it, and instead of going down smoothly and hitting it once clearly, it has a slight tremor and it give it not a clear impression. That is a way to describe MD. Sometimes you can see esentially the same thing when you do a stamp (like for a return address or something) and you are somewhat in motion at the time you make the 'strike'.... it can leave parts of the impression off or doubled, like in MD. Now die deterioration is more like a variety, in that the strike is not neccessarily bouncing or off, but the actual metal on the die has become unstable or flow lines have been created on the field area (usually) and around some of the sharper deliniated letters or parts of the design. It may be striking the coin without any real vibration or bounce, but it creates an effect that shows 'doubling' that is not a doubled die. Because of the wear neccessary to cause this kind of flow and deterioration, there is no set pattern that it can take, and it may show up, based on the use of the die either as portions of the die (as in parts of the die have either been fatigued in the metal at that point or has been excessively used due to positioning in the striking holder/chamber and other considerations). Sometimes you see die deterioration with mostly flow lines and little distortion on the lettering, other times it is only on parts of the design or lettering as distortion. Metals are 'fluid' in a sense in that even steel is not a single unit. Fatigue can apply to only portions of the steel in a die. But MD is more a glancing type of phenomenon, and die deterioration is more of a distortion of the features. Kind of hard to explain, but essentially, MD is an 'error' and Die deterioration is a 'variety'. Even though MD can look exactly the same on a number of coins, it is really not a variety, because the 'doubling' doesn't exist on the die, but is impressed on the coin due to the striking vibration and/or bounce, and the reason it looks the same is because of the way the die is positioned that the tolerance level for looking alike is introduced. But die deterioration is, essentially a variety, as each coin struck at that moment from the same die will be the same, with the exception of how the deterioration progresses (either quickly with a catastrophic failure) or slowly with introducing more fatigue symptoms into the actual die.

 

darn good post Kasia , maybe someone will read it and learn a couple of things. like the op's coin here in this thread because it is from worn dies other coins can be found almost exactly like it that was struck by the same dies as this one. almost all MD coins are not the same even coming from the same die. this is because on MD coins the details on the coins get's damaged from things like shifting dies, die bounce or during the ejection process . variety coins like doubled dies are struck from dies where the doubling is already on the die before striking the coins.

 

This is an unusual form of localized, premature die deterioration doubling. It is mainly seen on New Hampshire and New York quarters.

 

The doubling I see on those coins is made by the die moving in a single direction.

You can also often find die wear like that on 1982 and 83 nickels, especially on the FIVE CENTS and STATES

 

This is not garden-variety die deterioration doubling. In the affected New Hampshire and New York quarters, it's only the peripheral letters that are affected. The interior of the design usually shows no signs of die wear. Evidently there was something wrong with the die steel or we're dealing with faulty die preparation (annealing, tempering, quenching).

 

Well, that explains it, now go figure out surfing Abe. I'll keep this one in my ever expanding learning collection