Die crack - is this a total bust?

That's exactly what I was saying. In the foundry process as far as I discovered each type of metal has its own properties and refining process. And occasionally the scooper doesn't get all the impurities off the top of those soup. So what little impurities that's a scooper left gets poured into the final sheet. This is a long way of saying it's just crappy metal. All I basically know about this coin that I'm showing, I received it in really bad shape. You basically could not even tell it was a coin. And since I have found coins that have been buried in the dirt this object had resembled that. But to a little more extreme. I have found working across the country, different soils have different properties. And different acidity levels. That's why one coin found on the East Coast in the dirt will not resemble a coin found on the West Coast will to say they were both buried about the same time. But they will not look the same at least the ones I have found with a metal detector.

I have a lot of alloyed damage coins, maybe I ought to start a thread. My only problem with that my camera does not get the proper image of the damage. I need a lot more expensive set up. Were this old Redneck needs to sit down, take a bite of some fresh Redman, and contemplate the situation. Soon as I have this problem licked, I may start a thread. PS The more I look at the ops coin. The more I see some kind of a chemical inner action with the copper. And maybe one side is affected more than the other is because the reverse was subject to more of the chemical. Take a close look at the way it looks on the reverse. Some areas not exposed but three quarters of it was exposed. Just my observation

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

some corrosion, some cleaning, the rest lamination peels.

 

I'm a little confused here. When someone mentions lamination. I always think of something that is put together. Now in order for a copper penny which is 95% copper and 5% zinc. Now in order for this coin to have a lamination separation. Would be if it was put together in layers. Then I could buy the saying of lamination separation. In my understanding the raw piece of copper is consistently rolled under high pressure rollers to get the desired thickness. Thus forming a sheet of copper. How can one solid piece of copper have lamination problems. If you would not mind please explain how that works a solid piece of copper layering. I am always willing to learn something new. Ever since I've been on coin talk I've always heard members mention lamination when describing something wrong with silver and copper coins. Can someone with a lot of knowledge please show me how this is possible. Let me be clear (show me) if you're going to explain it to me I need to have it shown to me also. I really want to understand how this is possible.

 

I have a Lincoln or two with active (split but not detached) laminations. Don't necessarily know the specific physical causes, but I've a theory on the subject and will image and post them tonight after work.

 

Really like to see that Dave. I've got one that I need to dig up myself it's on a thread many moons ago.

 

When the metal is melted there are often bubbles of trapped gases contained within it, especially with the copper/zinc alloy because copper melts at a higher temperature than zinc boils. Normally you will try to hold the melt at a specific temperature for awhile to give the gasses a chance to slowly rise through the melt and escape at the surface. If you pour too soon or agitate the melt too much you can retain trapped gas bubbles inside the ingot. (it is also possible to get other contaminates, pieces of slag, excess flux for the surface of the melt etc, trapped inside the ingot.) Now when you roll out the ingot where do these bubbles or other contaminates go? They can't be reabsorbed into the solid metal so they tend to get flattened and spread out forming a hollow layer or layers inside the strip. If it is close enough to the outside surface it may break through creating a lamination. A larger void inside that doesn't break through can result in a "dumb" blank that will not ring when struck. If the bubble or contaminate is large enough it it may spread out larger than the diameter of the blank This is the cause of split planchets.

 

Laminated War nickel (very common).

First image is what the coin looks like when found. Surface splitting away after strike. Next, the lamination is folded up just a little. Finally the lamination is peeled completely back. This shows the dark brown impurity that was in the planchet and caused the lamination.

See @Conder101 explanation above.

 

I believe I said that earlier but I did not put it as eloquently as you have. You're absolutely correct in your statement except your use of the word laminations. Just because you have gas bubbles and contaminants causing a void in a solid piece of metal Weatherby copper brass gold silver whatever. I would like to know how you consider that lamination. I call it some kind of piece of garbage gas whatever causing a defect in that solid piece of metal.You know as well as I do what coins are laminated.Big difference in the silver and gold.I've always believe when you mentioned lamination separation it consist of more than one piece of metal. And just because a piece of metal separates from the coin does not mean is a lamination piece. Since the planchet was not laminated in the older coins. You basically have to call it what it is a defective planchet. Everyone finds it quite easy to say that about the new copper zinc cents. They are notorious for lamination problems. And to me that's what I consider lamination not a solid piece of metal Failure.

 

A lamination is material manufactured in layers. Conder's explanation meets that definition, the only difference being the layers are not deliberate.

But layers they are. What else are you going to call this?

 

Trapped gas inside a coin is not a lamination; HOWEVER, when circumstances cause it to break the surface they cause the metal to split = LAMINATION.

@usmc60 said: "And just because a piece of metal separates from the coin does not mean is a lamination piece." Actually it does. As long as it is a peel or tear as I illustrated. Your neat little picture of a laminating process has nothing to do with the lamination errors we see on coins.

"Planchet flaw" covers a wide category of characteristics. For example, on another thread there is a 1921 Morgan dollar struck on a defective planchet with a crack running into the design. That is also a planchet flaw BUT IT HAS A PARTICULAR NAME just as coins with a lamination.

 

lamination
noun

Definitions

1. An imperfection in a coil of steel resulting from blisters, seams, foreign material, and/or scratches on an ingot or billet of steel that are not repaired during the rolling process.

(It an also be called inclusions or Porosity depending on other factors.)

 

It is a general definition for steel which like coin metal is also an alloy. In this instance same rules apply.

 

Dave to make everyone happy. Though I may not agree with it. Proper term is
delamination
Metal missing or retained but peeling from the surface due to incomplete bonding or impurities in the planchet.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dave as you can plainly see in your own photo if you were to peel the contaminated area back you would see the metal becomes a solid piece of brass. And this is my own opinion since the old planchet's were made out of one piece of metal and not layered like current coins. And nowhere was lamination involved in the making of this planchet. I'll refer to it just as it is a defect in the planchet material. Causing the molecules to separate. During the rolling process.It still is what it is a defect in the metal.And just like your quote.A lamination is material manufactured in layers.deliberate.Or not. Again Dave just because your coin shows a missing piece of brass. And since it was not manufactured in layers even though your coin shows where the molecules did not bined to gather in the rolling process it seems like due to contaminants caused a separation in material. To me it is a defective planchet. No more. Since lamination was not involved I cannot honestly agree with lamination in terms of the error.Now this coin Dave I have no problem in agreeing with a lamination error because as we all know this coin was put together in layers, and this planchet definitely has some problems. This process also occurred in the rolling process of the lamination between layers of metal. Keyword lamination the combining of metals. Big difference in a molecule separation due to contaminants in the metal. But I guess it's just easier to say lamination problem. And we all should throw party and be happy with that term. It is incorrect term for your coin. But I guess it's just easier to say it that way.PS.Dave I'm not the only one that has a problem with this definition. As brought up to me on several occasions, how can a solid piece of brass have a lamination problem. Because they are thinking lamination is combining material together. Which is absolutely true. Then you tried to explain to them how gases and debris can cause a solid piece of metal to separate. They still want to know how it's involved in lamination.Maybe I'm just like them and want to know where the word lamination came in. Since nothing was laminated.? All I can tell them is that's what the good book says.

 

Well, that's what we call them in numismatics. It's your right if you want to use another word, but that's what we call it. You can call the coin in your image a Nickel if you want; we're going to continue calling it a Cent.

 

Why would I want to call a cent a nickel get real. Even with my dyslexia I know the difference between lamination separation. And molecular separation because of contaminants two different books. But just because they put it as a numismatics definition does not make it right. It just shows people that changes need to be made. I can show you books out of the library that say Christopher Columbus discovered America. I also can show you books that says Pluto is a planet. And as we all know now they are totally wrong. And when a Solid piece of metal separates do to a contaminant. That has nothing to do with lamination separation. Dave that's just common sense. Molecular separation is totally different. If I'm not mistaken are we supposed to try and present the most accurate information. And if I was to critique your coin I would say due to the year, that your error is a defective planchet caused by contaminants in the foundry process. And that area of missing brass as you can plainly see the contaminated area causing that piece of brass to dislodge.Again nothing to do with lamination. Or as the book calls it the delamination.Dave commonsense how can you delaminate something that hasn't been laminated. Dave I firmly believe in the saying that one person can make a change. And you can't grow a tomato plant unless you plant the seed.Change May not come today or tomorrow or even in my lifetime. But as the millennium's takeover, hopefully there will be change. I'm just hoping I'm alive to see it happen.

 

It doesn't show changes need to be made - it shows you need to accept the fact that numismatics, like any other specialty, has trade-specific language and it's downright silly not to accept that. When we talk about "cuds," we're not talking about grass in a cow's mouth, even though that's another acceptable definition of the term.

You don't want to learn. You want to dictate. I quit helping you because of this before, and I'm going to go back to ignoring you until you decide to live in the same reality as the rest of the hobby.

 

I love this forum! Debate and disagreements really add to the fun! I have learned more about laminations (or planchet defects) just in this thread than I got searching the web! I do agree that the use of the work "lamination" is deceiving as I think of a lamination as something that covers something else. Thanks for the analysis and pictures.
I will say that I'm virtually certain that the coin is authentic.

 

Dave I learn something new every day of my life. And I will continue to learn something new up until the day I die. Why is it so hard for you and others to accept that people may not go down the same road that you go down. Or believe in what you believe in. Out of all my flaws the one that really upsets people the most is that I call it the way I see it. And Dave is not willing to accept something, it's more of saying the truth. Unlike some men if their woman asked them if the pants there wearing makes her butt look big. Oh no dear it looks beautiful it's perfect, when in reality their thinking you look like a southbound side of a northbound hippo. Point is I just call it the way I see it.I do not sugarcoat things.You know it's easy to put someone down because they do not believe in the same thing you believe in. Fortunately I do not judge people that why. But on coin talk a lot of members do. And Dave that's not right. And if you choose to put me on the ignore because I do not think the way you believe in what you may believe in then so be it. All I did was point out two separate things and according to the book it is written so shall it be. (delamination).BS USMC60

 

In order to have delamination you first have to have a laminated material which this is not. I think you are misunderstanding the form of the word.

To laminate means the layering and bonding of 2 or more materials.

Delamination means the separation of those previously layered and bonded materials.

Lamination is term used to describe a defect that occurred in the manufacturing process in a solid material that for one of many reasons caused separations to occur in the final product.

Wikipedia is a great quick "go to" for some information, however I would never use that for technical arguments. They are just a bunch of "just out of High Schoolers" searching whatever for information they can find on a subject and they also receive input from people just like us that is mostly unconfirmed. They should never be considered to be the "Authority" on anything.

The proper term for this in metallurgy is:

(Spalling - Buckling or flaking off of the surface material.)

which is usually caused by:

(Inclusions - Nonmetallic materials in a metal matrix. Sources include reoxidation, refractories, slag, and deoxidization products.)

or by:

(Impurities - An element unintentionally allowed in a metal or alloy. Some impurities have little effect on properties; others will grossly damage the alloy.)

other causes can be improperly mixed metal alloy matrixes.

A "Laminate" is a material manufactured in layers. In metallurgy the term used wouldn't be either, the actual term is called "Clad" or "Cladding".

clad
(klæd)
v. clad, clad•ding,
adj. v.t.
1. to bond a metal to (another metal), esp. to provide with a protective coat.
adj.
2. bonded with a protective metallic coat: copper-clad cookware.

Typically the terms "Laminate" or "Lamination" would be used in other industries like Woodworking and technically it is not combining materials, its layering them to achieve greater strength, or a lighter and more cost effective product. In Metallurgy the term "Laminate" is not used and "Lamination" is used as a defect and not an intended outcome.

These terms have been used in this industry for many, many, many years which is why its called and "Industry Term" and they are recognized world wide. I seriously doubt that anyone will change them based solely because someone does not agree or accept them. JMHO!

Now, About your coin! I personally like it and if it were mine I would be proud to have it in my collection. There are several things that I see on it that people haven't addressed yet and for that reason, at least for now I am going to hold my opinion about what I think actually caused this. I think it is a very interesting piece and I do agree that is a planchet error so in my opinion it should demand a small premium over normal value.