The Two S&L Dies for RK's

[Dave Kane]

Simple economics George....65 years ago wasn't a 'throw away' world like it is today!


One of our members ( I think a former tool/die ) maker offered a wonderfully simple method of 'prolonging' a die...


George we got quite far today in the discussion of ONE or TWO die.....it's convoluted enough without another tangent so how about a new thread directed at the entire Forum...medals, badges, helmets and weapons all of which utilized tool makers and some of the guys who participate there may not visit here!

[George Stimson]

That's a very good suggestion, Dave. But I think I'll stick with the specifics of EK frames. Helmets, etc. are too far removed from what we're talking about here. And I also think I'll go ahead and call a few metal shops anyway. Maybe they still have some workers around who would remember how things were done in the old days.

[Brian S]

Thanks Tom, Dave, Dietrich and George. Good discussion. Had a four hour little league game to go to... Boys won 28 to 6!

Dietrich we are certainly in agreement with regard to A and B types. And we are in agreement to sequence of cross pressings.

Without your efforts, we wouldn't have that. Also, we wouldn't have progressed where we have without your article. In short, without your article the S&L was a large uknown and now we are narrowing the gap dramatically.

Thanks again Tom.

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dietrich we are certainly in agreement with regard to A and B types. And we are in agreement to sequence of cross pressings.
Without your efforts, we wouldn't have that. Also, we wouldn't have progressed where we have without your article. In short, without your article the S&L was a large uknown and now we are narrowing the gap dramatically.

Thanks Brian

It was what we call in Germany a "harte Geburt" but it was absolutely worth it! It the contents of the article couldn't have stood up (at least in the principle outcome of A and B-Type) it would not have been worth the paper it was written on. It was tough test, but it's for the better of the community.

I also thank Dave, Brian, Tom and George (and myself) for staying level and focused as hard it might have been....

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Careful Brian, I know this guy Dietrich!! The discussions behind the scenes were intense and ongoing and nothing is signed just yet!!


He may be creating a 'flower war' and suddenly....BANG!!!

I haven't heard him say......'ONE DIE' yet!! He's still on about the alphabet

[Dietrich Maerz]

Dave!

Maybe your discussions behind the scenes were intense and ongoing - I was facing it alone (take away the occasional "Cheer" )!

And yes, I have not submitted to the ONE die! Why? Because at this time there is not need to! Time will tell, further thinking/study/knowledge is neccessary.

And I'm not preparing an ambush or such.

I'm happy that we can all agree on the A and B Type CROSS. And it's about the crosses and not the die(s), isn't it?

Dietrich

[Marc Garlasco]

Brian, don't they have a mercy rule???

Gents, with all due respect, if it is 2 dies, or rehabilitated, does it matter? If rehabilitated (which I must say has some logic to it), there would still be these flaws of the rehabilitated RK die that would only be seen on crosses made exceedingly late if not completely post war. Am I way off here?

Marc

[Brian S]

Marc, I think as we get more crosses that are B type and later we will see the original flaws reappear and new flaws overlay the originals and the old flaws mutate as some of the patch material holds. I don't think the A type will look exactly like the B type again. Logically repairs will cause the die to stress elsewhere until the repairs fail.

B types now need to be studiously examined. A time line of these need to be examined. I am curious how the spilt material held up over time, the dent row.

[Dietrich Maerz]

I don't think the A type will look exactly like the B type again. .

Don't you think this should say: "I don't think the B-Type will look exactly like the A-Type again."??

Dietrich

[Brian S]

Yes A NE B and B NE A.

[tom hansen]

Reading this thread I have been very impressed how, through back and forth debate and presentation of information, you guys really came up with something VERY interesting and significant. This was fun to read and at the end it seems as though this whole issue is much clearer. Thanks Deitrich, Brian and Dave for the effort here !

[Bob Hritz]

Apparantly, my post on the repair of damaged dies was somehow overlooked. I repeat from my previous post:


The use of a casting to make a second die is not correct. I am unaware of any steel alloy that could be cast and have the strength to withstand the force of a die press. Casting is the cheapest way of fabrication and more often than not, leaves flaws in the product (ie; the die). The steel used is rolled through heavy rollers to produce as flawless block material as possible. Cast material has random molecular structure. A heated stock that is passed through pressure rollers stabilizes molecular structure and produces more alligned molecules, producing stronger material more capable of being tempered/hardened.

My hypothesys is that a cracked die can be fitted into a die sleeve, which is another block, cut to tightly fit the EXACT outer measurements of the original, cracked die. This forces the cracks in the original housed die closed. Now, if the pressman doesn't adjust the travel of the press correctly, on a set of dies, the dies break or develop cracks. It is not impossible that the original die, placed into a die sleeve block, could develop a new series of cracks which may or may not correspond to the original set of die cracks. If the pressman under-sets the travel, a weak or incomplete product is the result.

As for debris finding it's way into die blocks, that is very common. Die blocks are lugricated so the extraction of the finished stamping is easily removed. Dirt, oil, and tiny debris can contaminate a die, but they leave impressions INTO the stamped product, not add to it. Even if a sliver of silver would contaminate a die, that piece would be bonded to the frame and would be a blob. That blob may or may not be removeable, but it would be in the reverse of the flaws found on St&L frames, Dietrich is correct that contamination of the dies with debris could not account for the die flaws. They can only correspond to a crack in the die.

Why is the crack on the beaded/ridged edges? This is simple. The deepest part of a die is the weakest, where there is less steel between the die press and top of the die. Science proves that the weakest part of any surface is the most prone to breakage.

The most logical conclusion I can come to is the master die. This is a positive image of the frame from which the production dies are made.This master die is pressed into the annealed (softened) die material. The production die material is cleaned, polished, and then hardened/tempered to accept the pressure of the press. The master die is commonly used today, as it was in the past. A good example is the US Medal of Honor master die. I believe it is still in the Smithsonian and was used to make the production die for the Civil War era Medal of Honor. Even with a perfect master die, the MOH was flawed! This is because the first press of the master into the annealed production die was not clear enough and they made a second pressing into the same production die. A tiny misallignment casued some of the stars, in the pattern, to be double struck creating a flawed double edge. The flaw was so minute, only collectors had noticed or cared.

I am of the opinion the die was reused, after fitting into a new die block. This explains the similarities as well as moving flaws.

Bob Hritz

[Brian S]

Bob, not at all overlooked.

"I am of the opinion the die was reused, after fitting into a new die block. This explains the similarities as well as moving flaws."

[Dave Kane]

Bob, I already referenced your most logical post...I just couldn't recall who posted it otherwise I'd have called your name!


We are still at a 'crossroads' as evidenced by recent posts....

[Pieter Verbruggen]

Hi Dietrich,
I would like to give you my congratulations for your splendid research.
I didn't get involved in the discussion because I could only repeat my earlier statements, which I cannot prove....

....there was more than "one" die involved with the production of Steinhauer & Luck Knights Crosses.

....they worked from a "mother die" to produce more "working" die's.

...."working" dies can be produced as Bob Hritz explains ( I saw it with my own eyes, so NOBODY will take this away from me...)


Regards Pieter.