2000-D LMC Rockwell Test Mark In Planchet? Or PSD?

The one "documented" example I have found is located here:
http://www.error-ref.com/?s=rockwell

I guess it helps a little, but the location on the coin is different, so the metal flow after the strike is different.

Halo1st - thanks for your experiment...food for thought. The first thing I notice is a "pressure ridge" on the lower edge of the indention. As I understand it, this is indicative of an impact on the coin after it has been struck. So, while it is similar to a Rockwell Test Mark, it becomes clear that it was done on the coin itself and not the planchet before the strike.

The other difference is the shape of the indention in your experiment which is different from that in a Rockwell Test. Yours is more "cone" shaped rather than hemispherical as is the case with a Rockwell Test indention. I think this is a minor difference, however - determined by the shape of the point which made contact. Had you used something different, you might have been able to more closely resemble the indention from a Rockwell Test. The key question is how to do this on a coin without a pressure ridge being formed! I do not know if that is possible!

In the only documented example I have found, you can see the hemispherical shape of the indention (made slightly elliptical by die flow) without the presence of a pressure ridge. You can see that here:
http://www.error-ref.com/?s=rockwell

I understand, Condor101, that you are saying it is impossible for a Rockwell test mark on a planchet to survive in the field, because all metal would flow into the mark.

I can understand what you are saying about a raised area of the design being the last to fill when applied to the obverse, because it would be the highest point on a coin which is being held in a horizontal position. A raised area on the coin on the reverse would be the lowest point. The only answer would have to be that the metal flows from the center of the coin (planchet) outward, unaffected by gravity. Is that the way it happens?

To say it a different way: I do not understand why the metal would be less likely to flow into an area containing a column. The Reverse is the anvil die, as I understand it, so the column area on the coin being struck would represent the lowest point on the coin which is being held in a horizontal plane. Why wouldn't the metal flow to the lowest point first? Why wouldn't that make a test mark in the field more likely to survive than one on a column? The test mark in the field would be higher than the test mark where a column ends up being struck.

I also note that in the photo on error-ref, the test mark is not just exclusively on the raised portion of the column. It is broad enough to carry into the field on both sides. It seems that, if the mark cannot survive in the field, at least the portions of it in the field should have been eliminated?

I have been searching for other verified images of a Rockwell Mark on a planchet and have found none at all. Very curious about that - not even any others not in the field!

I appreciate the sympathy, Buddy! I guess that it is not the first time in my life I have been frustrated, though!