The Two S&L Dies for RK's

[Marc Garlasco]

Dietrich,

You must admit that Germans are amazing people! Who knows what they might do?

Marc

[Dietrich Maerz]

Most and foremost "practical" and "pragmatic", I guess .

Dietrich

[Sal Williams]

Hi Fellows,
Though my head is spinning (great article btw dietrich!) trying to stay clear with what you are all saying, I still think you are all shooting from the hip. there are a number of possibilities that would alternatly explain some parts of each theory. You all seem to be missing a major point. There are a number of ways a die could be produced (or reproduced) Most likely. If working from a" negative' die and reproducing from that a positive and then making ANOTHER die (a negative) The dent row could be explained. But if starting with a POSITE to re produce a die you would end up with a different set of circumctances. It seems that a vital part of the research is missing. HOW AND WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE WAYS TO REPRODUCE A DIE that would copy Daves "flaws".A 2nd die theory HAS to reproduce those! What would you start with and what are the processes? A "mother" die? Does anyone know if such a thing actually exists (not on RKs, but in general)? If there were 2 dies I would assume that S&L used a VERY high pressure (too high) since both have major flaws at some point. High pressure on a flawed die must lead to known consequences among tradesmen. On Dietrichs pics it seems that the non matching flaws in both directions (disappearing and appearing) show some trace of the flaw in the valley of the "unflawed " piece. Dietrich is this true? A 2nd die under high pressure(on the other hand) Would tend to break in the same places in general (I would think) but not in all the same places as well as some different places. Talk to peaple in the field guys! Now my head hurts and I must sleep!!!!!

Best, Sal

[Dietrich Maerz]

[QUOTE=Sal Williams] On Dietrichs pics it seems that the non matching flaws in both directions (disappearing and appearing) show some trace of the flaw in the valley of the "unflawed " piece. Dietrich is this true? [QUOTE]

Sal,

it's not true. No trace whatsoever on the pristine 935-4. None, nada, zilch, zero, nichts, niente, ... flat as a baby's back. And they had a 5:1 plaster model as the 'mother'. That is known.

I know, I'm repeating myself over and over again:

IT DOES NOT MATTER WHETHER ONE DIE OR TWO.

The important thing are the cross types and the fact that B comes after A !!!

The important thing now is to find the first post-45 B-Type with swastika! I thought that was the whole idea! We are waisting our energy on a futile question.

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

Dietrich..great, now you take a moment and identify the minute flaws I have shown on the 935/4 ( I have mapped them out and highlighted them in yellow ) that you have in hand and reasonably explain how those would be replicated...

The general design and layout of the ribs and cross tips (maybe) but not these tiny areas.

If this multi die technology existed then, the guys in (our) badge Forum wouldn't have much to chat about as all the Para badges, Juncker Pilot and High Seas badges would be the same.

This only happened with the S&L RK die......of course anticipating thousands upon thousands of stampings the Mgt. looked way ahead and produced multiple die expecting failure while the rest of the medal and badge industry languished in old technology.

[Dietrich Maerz]

As I said earlier: those minute flaws were somehow but undoubtly created at one point in time, at least with the first die. Therefore one can say without reasonable doubt that it is possible to create them (from a pure mechanical point of view). They are a mechanical creation!

Since that is the case, then it can be done again!

A lot of people seem to be under the assumption that the second die must have been created by copying the first die. That is not true. Both dies, first and second, were created by use of a 5:1 plaster model, pantograph and milling machine. At least, that is what I think.

But again. If this discussion is now about one or two dies and must continue till somebody gives in and the other party can say "I'm right!!" .......i think it's a huge waste of energy - for absolutely nothing to gain!

Dietrich

[Dave Kane]

DM, you keep insisting that the 5:1 plaster model was used....where did you glean this information?

You have qualified the statement with "this is known"..

From, whom and or where?

[Skipper Greenwade]

I thought all daughters were perfect...at least in their fathers' eyes

Skip

"I agree completey that perfect copies are impossible, unless one is using the same die."

Does this also apply to perfect copies (daughters) being made from the same (mother) die? <!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Tiger 1]

Gentlemen,

Some further notes on diemaking and die pressed versus die striking or forging. And some other interesting stuff.

I will start with dies.

First up is the creation of a MASTER DIE. This master die is cut usually by hand and finished by the engraver or engravers. When the sunken image that is engraved into the die is acceptable this master die is then hardened and tempered properly for use. This is the master die from which all other identical dies would be made from using a Hub or the Hubbing process. Hence the name MASTER DIE. Master dies are never used for production of the given product.

It is known the the design and original master dies for the Iron Cross and Knights Cross frames were engraved by Herr Escher, Master Engraver with S&L. Whether or not these were shared with other companies is not known.

There are other methods os producing master dies that are used in mints around the world. A portrait lathe was one means of mechanically making a master die from a model. The Hill Reducing machine used by the US Mint was the perfection of this portrait lathe process. The developement of the JANVIER LATHE was the epitome of copying intricate details in three dimensions.The Janvier lathe was in effect a highly sensitive pantograph that was capable of working on three dimensions.

I mentioned the other methods as they apply to the making of dies used in the minting of coins. I don't see the need for a three dimensional lathe for the production of any EK/KC type of medal.

I seem to have digressed from the main line of thought regarding the production of and use of dies. Onward then............

The HUB is created when the hardened negative image master die is pressed down onto an annealed steel die form called a hub. The image that results is in the positive or raised form as it would be in the finished product. The hub itself is then inspected, adjusted , polished and finally hardened and tempered for it's use. The sole purpose of the hub is to create working dies. The hub is also not used for producing the product.

The finished hub is then used to make any and all further WORKING DIES. Working dies can be returned to the engraver to be adjusted as necessary depending on requirements. These working dies are also hardened and tempered when they are found to be acceptable for the job at hand. These working dies are just that. They are the dies that produce the identical copies of what ever is pressed with them. These working dies will be the same as the hub used to create them except they will be in the negative image as is the original master die.

The difference mentioned above between die pressing and die stamping or forging is this. Die pressing is done with a controlled screw design press which in effect pushes the metal being worked into the die at a controlled rate. On the other hand die striking or die forging, as the name implies, is done on a different type of apparatus that uses the IMPACT of the die to form the object. This impact can be driven by as simple a tool such as a drop hammer or can be done hydrolicaly. The die striking or forging process is usually used for making items that are not critical in initial fineness of detail.

Die pressing was used extensively in producing most of the frames for EKs during the 1914-1918 era and as well as into the 1939-1945. By extension the manufacture process of KC frames would have been the same. The only major change in frame production was the introduction of the automated Gablonzer method used to speed up the manufacture of EK frames to meet the heavy demands of war. The relatively small numbers of KCs needed and the fact that the KC was the premier award it's production was never changed to the Gablonzer method as far as is known today. The need for that level of mass production was not required.

As the entire process of constructing and finishing an EK/KC medal is well illustrated in several publications on the EK series I will not further bore you with my rendition of those facts.

I do wish to say a word or two about the term 'frosting' as related to the chemical application of it versus the 'painted" type. To be specific I am talking about the term 'pickle ling". 'Pickleling' is used in the jewelry trade to chemically clean metal before soldering to provide a clean surface for the flux to bite the metals to be soldered. 'Pickeling' is also used after the soldering process to chemically clean up the flux and other soldering residue. Pickeling is done with an acid solution and when used on silver will 'Frost' the metal as it cleans it.

This chemical frosting is left on the beading and the flange after the assembled cross is pickeled after soldering. The flanges are then burnished brite using a burin specifically ground and polished smooth for that purpose. In effect a very thin layer of the frost is scraped off as the burnisher or burin leaves the brite finish behind. Many times we can easily see the effects of the burnisher as fine lines on the flange parallel with the beading. This method of hand burnishing often left the chemical frost on the edges of the flange and in the numbers and letters stamped on the flange flats in the case of marked KCs.This chemical frosting was not put on after the burnishing as was the painted on type. Look closely at the two types and it will become readily apparent with some effort at study.

I hope that this info is of some help in defining some of the terms and processes we are discussing. Sometimes it seems that both sides of this imensely interesting and very important thread are almost talking about the same thing but in different dialects.

Again please keep in mind that this is just a thinly fleshed out version of the die pressing process as well ast the finishing of the EK/KC.

That's it for now. Thanks for sticking it out to this point.

Tony

[Tiger 1]

Damn! With all the blah, blah blah that I typed above I forgot to mention that any metal that was initially put into the die for pressing was in the DEAD SOFT or ANNEALLED state. The pressure required to press the thin sheet of silver or nickle silver would have been exceedingly minimal as would have been any heat build up. The thin sheets of either metal would not have stressed the heavy dies in any appreciable manner.

Tony

[Skipper Greenwade]

Whether it's true or not, I feel at least partly responsible for the now years-long "die flaw = fake" debate, as it was my S&L RK - the one pictured in Arthur Hayes' SS book that really got the ball rolling.

As my posts in the early thread(s) would indicate, from the outset I felt that the existence of more than one set of dies was a distinct, logical possibility. Given the fact that the good folks at S&L had been told by their dear Fuhrer that the Reich would last a thousand years, why is it so hard to fathom that they simply had the die maker crank out an extra - perhaps at or about the same time the first one was created? Since we have evidence of other dies breaking/cracking/flawing, it must have been common knowledge among those engaged in the trade that damage to a die was likely, if not certain...the question may well have been not if, but when? We have established that the master, or 'mother' pattern was the difficult part. With that behind them, why would a large manufacturing concern like S&L have risked being overtaken by their competitors over some thing so simple and -relatively speaking - inexpensive as a second die?

Just so I leave no doubt, you can count me solidly in Deitrich's corner with those who believe in a second set of dies.

With that said and for what it's worth (as I think further argument is pointless since (1. neither side is going to move further toward the center and (2. on a personal note, any input from me may be regarded as having an ulterior motive because I own a flawed, "800"-marked RK!), if we dispense with the terms "A" die / "B"die and instead move forward with "A" cross and "B" cross, the mystery may be closer than most of us ever dreamed!

In any event, Dietrich, et.al., this has been a helluva thread

Best,
Skip

[George Stimson]

"Given the fact that the good folks at S&L had been told by their dear Fuhrer that the Reich would last a thousand years, why is it so hard to fathom that they simply had the die maker crank out an extra - perhaps at or about the same time the first one was created?"

Exactly. How many people in 1939 imagined that their whole NS society would be finished -- for good -- a mere six years later?

[Dave Kane]

I must agree...one of the best debates we have had!!!


Tony thanks for the lesson and back-up post it clarifies things for those of us not in the industry...

I'm still a bit confused about the 'plaster' die and the 10,000lb pressure that has been asserted and ofcourse the pantograph (machine)...

Which is which and if die can be easly replicated why so many fakes today?

I'm still suited toward ONE die for the S&L RK...

[Dave Kane]

"Given the fact that the good folks at S&L had been told by their dear Fuhrer that the Reich would last a thousand years, why is it so hard to fathom that they simply had the die maker crank out an extra - perhaps at or about the same time the first one was created?"

Exactly. How many people in 1939 imagined that their whole NS society would be finished -- for good -- a mere six years later?

George...it didn't start in '39!!! I have the Law books that show the preparations and regulations started WAY before that and even the Spanish Cross wasn't a secondary thought of 'Hey let's propose, design and manufacture this...' after the fact.

[Tiger 1]

George,

The thousand year Reich was so confident in victory that they didn't crank up production of essential fighter aircraft till they were in dire staights! The production of decorations surely wasn't too high a priority at that time either.

Tony.