K&Q electron miscroscopy preliminary results- facinating

[Dietrich Maerz]

Brian is absolutely right!

By doing this in an uncoordinated way we leave all doors open for critique, contamination and false base lines.

I propose to come up with a "Standard" which describes the procedure of cleaning the to be tested spots, the spots itself and -of course - the description of the actual test parameters. And othjer things we do not know yet...

I will have a meeting with the Prof of the Michigan University set up next week and will discuss with him the best way to do this in his opinion. He seems to be very open and interested.

The problem however is this: We need a lot of data! I intend to test at least all known EK1 manufacturers. I have quite a few, but I might need more. Who is willing to trust me or Tom or whoever else might jump in to send EK1 for testing? If I can only test my collection, the full semester is way too long.

Of course one of the interesting objects are the S&L's. Tom has some, I guess. But who is willing to provide a flawed S&L, or 935? I guess a clean and flawed 57 S&L might not be a problem.

But again. First we need to have a solid base line. What are we looking for and were are we looking.

Every input is greatly appreciated!

Dietrich

[George Stimson]

"Who is willing to trust me or Tom or whoever else might jump in to send EK1 for testing?"

[Dietrich Maerz]

"Who is willing to trust me or Tom or whoever else might jump in to send EK1 for testing?"

I gather this is a "YES!"

Dietrich

[George Stimson]

You gather correctly, mein Herr!

[Jon Fish]

Tom, they'll come out of the darkness if we don't make sure our methodology here is consistent and produces consistent results based on absolutely like procedures.

We need to make sure that as people now get the bug to rush out and try this that the engineer who works the SEM uses the same techniques as your man did or at least a procedure is established.

On an EK/RK: At the very least what is going to be tested? Paint front and back? Frame? Frosted area?

Does surface patina, dust, dirt etc. play any part at all in the 'fingerprint'?

I hope we get the procedures published here before anyone spends time on this and we discover we do not have comparable results.

Two original Juncker RKs would be a great test at two different sites. Most of us agree Juncker was not copied as the dies did not survive. Therefore, if that theory is correct, the results of two rks from Juncker must be the same IF; paint used is the same, frame material is the same and frosting technique is the same. I can imagine different results over the life of the Juncker RK but that is something else we should see and understand.

Wouldn't it be something if for example for some specimens of Juncker RKs the paint is the same fingerprint as on other RKs? Or frame composition the same fingerprint?

Much to do, very early in the process...

It was said earlier in the thread by Tom that the RK must be cleaned with soap and distilled water first before testing. So that should remove anything that could contaminate the test results.Maybe a set soap and distilled water should be used,a soap that is to be used on all the tests.
But I am still a little afraid to wash my RK what about rust,even if dried?
Also the patina that some of us find so delightful will be taken away.
Anyone feel this'washing' will be a problem down the line?

Great work and Tom should be remembered for starting all this new 'Hansen Method' .

[Marc Garlasco]

Just got this from an old high school buddy now working in a geology department:
-----------------------------------------------------
Hey Marc,

Yes, we do have a scanning electron microscope. I'm pretty much in
charge of operating it and the electron microprobe.
-----------------------------------------------------

That is EXACTLY what I wanted to hear!!! Will let you know when I get it set up.
Marc

[Sebastian Bianchi]

Marc I'll see you at Union, hopefully I can go with you and bring other goodies (including a 57 S&L without flaws, the K&Q, etc).

[jujuy]

Dietrich, As you said in a previous answer, the originality of a cross is evaluated with frame and core characteristics.

The only interest of this study couyld be the analysis of flawed S&L and round corner. Is the paint is very different (no black bone) from supposed pre1945 exemples, we could ascertain that these crosses are post 1945 and we have to search for rhodium in the frosting
The only question to get an answers: did all the manufacturers used black bone to paint the core.

Brian is absolutely right!

By doing this in an uncoordinated way we leave all doors open for critique, contamination and false base lines.

I propose to come up with a "Standard" which describes the procedure of cleaning the to be tested spots, the spots itself and -of course - the description of the actual test parameters. And othjer things we do not know yet...

I will have a meeting with the Prof of the Michigan University set up next week and will discuss with him the best way to do this in his opinion. He seems to be very open and interested.

The problem however is this: We need a lot of data! I intend to test at least all known EK1 manufacturers. I have quite a few, but I might need more. Who is willing to trust me or Tom or whoever else might jump in to send EK1 for testing? If I can only test my collection, the full semester is way too long.

Of course one of the interesting objects are the S&L's. Tom has some, I guess. But who is willing to provide a flawed S&L, or 935? I guess a clean and flawed 57 S&L might not be a problem.

But again. First we need to have a solid base line. What are we looking for and were are we looking.

Every input is greatly appreciated!

Dietrich

[Marc Garlasco]

Let's just get a good baseline of data. Tom showed that K&Q EK2s were elementally similar to the RKs. So I will test a 65 EK1 to see if it carries over. If we see that all makers used the exact same components for all of their stuff we will have something interesting here.

Bottom line: This is groundbreaking work, but let's take the time to do good scientific study and develop a SOLID, unquestionable database. Then we can perform some good analysis and draw conclusions. But keep the thoughts flowing as this open forum is very helpful in developing our procedures...

Marc

[Sebastian Bianchi]

I suppose that I was one that was a little skeptical about this sort of approach at first, and I am still a bit saddened that this is what it's come to. When I took up collecting, I did it for my interest in history, not microscopic molecules or paint composition.

That said, I was looking forward to the results and this has proven to be a very worthy incursion and I could see where, if done correctly, it can become a very useful tool to help us all. I will contribute in any way I can.

I don't know what plans there are already in progress but can gather data and post it on a permanent spot on the site. Giving Tom much deserved credit for the idea we could all pool our efforts and compare the data.

[Marc Garlasco]

Tom,

A follow-up question from my friend:

Oh, one more thing, Marc. When you call around, ask what kind of
sample
preparation is needed. We usually coat samples with carbon or gold...
though I figure that your friend that has already done some work
has an idea of what is needed for sample prep.

[coastie]

I suppose that I was one that was a little skeptical about this sort of approach at first, and I am still a bit saddened that this is what it's come to. When I took up collecting, I did it for my interest in history, not microscopic molecules or paint composition.

I think we all came into the hobby with the same idea in mind. However now that TR/militaria items are getting up into the 5 figure ($) range it becomes necessary to have this assurance that what we buy is authentic and not totally rely on dubious provenance before we buy.

This is not much different in the art world/historical artifacts that forensic verification is warranted at times to assure authenticity.

TOM, WELL DONE INDEED! I will help out anyway I can to see this continue on.

[jujuy]

You don't need any sample preparation. If you gilted you RK, I feel you'll create a new pattern.

The RK or EK metal or paint just needs to conduct the electron.
Just have to clean with soapy water and rinse it well
Phil

Tom,

A follow-up question from my friend:

Oh, one more thing, Marc. When you call around, ask what kind of
sample
preparation is needed. We usually coat samples with carbon or gold...
though I figure that your friend that has already done some work
has an idea of what is needed for sample prep.

[Sebastian Bianchi]

I think we all came into the hobby with the same idea in mind. However now that TR/militaria items are getting up into the 5 figure ($) range it becomes necessary to have this assurance that what we buy is authentic and not totally rely on dubious provenance before we buy.

I hear you...

[Erich B.]

It would be fascinating if any company could transport a unit to, for example, the SOS or the MAX show, and offer analysis of items for a fee. I'll bet there would be enough interest to make it profitable for the lab although some dealers would probably shudder in horror!
Erich