| Author |
 Replies: 21 / Views: 2,695 |
Page 2 of 2
|
|
|
|
Pillar of the Community
 United States
3331 Posts |
I will work on a full coin photo a little later. In the meantime, I had a very knowledgeable individual tell me this which I had not known: Quote:
The lamination was a part of the planchet before the coin was struck. It doesn't "develop" after the coin is struck, so to that effect, ALL lamination issues are pre-strike. Any comments? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I have been thinking about pre and post strike lamination possibilities. I really do not understand why a lamination cannot develop after the strike. It seems like the propensity for a lamination could exist in a planchet, but not manifest itself until after the strike. Why couldn't that happen? So I started searching for a reference and found this: Quote:
Lamination errors can develop before or after the strike. Source: http://www.error-ref.com/?s=pre...3;laminationNow I would just like to understand which this one is.It sort of seems to have characteristics of both. So which is it and why? Here is a photo of the entire reverse:  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
I feel that laminations are a planchet issue. the metal is cut, they if there is any imperfections in the stock material, the upset process that turns a blank into a planchet will sometimes loosen the material. after the coin is struck they can peel away from the coin. Depending on the issue with the stock material. They tend to run in straight lines that are sometimes cut between where there maybe a weakness of adherence of the stock material. But they do peel sometimes before a strike or after a strike. (most of the times after the strike) So I don't know if the term 'develop' covers a peel, because that happens after the strike.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I can understand what you are saying and it sounds like a reasonable explanation to me. Thanks.
So how would you describe the coin in the OP - pre or post?
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Note how the edge of the peel has moved a bit in circulation. That happened after the strike. The weight puts it in the correct weight range with a bit less to allow for what may have peel off. If it were a piece of debris, it doesn't have to be in a straight line like a lamination. So I feel this coin is probably a lamination issue. But I would still like to see a bit wider angle of this coin to see it if is straight on the area we can't see. If it pans out a bit, then I would lean toward a struck through. (but weight probably confirms this is not the case as a struck though might a bit heavier than normal. (depending on how thick the addition was)
But when we talk about pre-strike or post strike, we are referring to if the lamination had fallen off before or after the strike. On this coin it is peeling after the strike. (the metal alignment is slightly moved on 'U' on UNUM)
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
Quote:
But I would still like to see a bit wider angle of this coin to see it if is straight on the area we can't see. Do you mean more of an edge shot? |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
Here is view at an angle.  |
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
There is were the missing material that peeled off that area and lighten the coin a bit. That peel did move a bit.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I am interested in learning whether this is pre or post strike and how that is known?
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
534 Posts |
It is a post strike. If it were a pre strike lamination then the flaking part wouldn't be there. It would have already fallen off before the strike. Yours still has the flaking part on the coin so it would have to be a post strike.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I do not really understand why the flake would have to fall off before the strike.  I did find a comment on one of the CCF threads which suggested that the opposite face of the coin opposite the feature would be a bit weakly struck in a pre strike lamination. Mine is not, so I am now leaning the other direction - towards a post strike lamination. Edited by Pete2226
06/19/2016 3:07 pm
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
It would be post strike. The peel loosened later. If it happened pre-strike, then we would not see the displacement of the lamination. It would be straight on the rim area.
|
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
Quote:
If it happened pre-strike, then we would not see the displacement of the lamination. It would be straight on the rim area. Helpful! Thanks!  |
|
Pillar of the Community
United States
3331 Posts |
I have had someone suggest to me that this is a folded over rim burr. I have not hear of rim burrs, much less folded over.
Does anyone have any comments about that?
Does anyone have a link to a resource on rim burrs I could read?
Does anyone have an image of a rim burr they could post?
Thanks for any help!
|
|
Bedrock of the Community
United States
62064 Posts |
Here is a link on finning on Mike Diamond's web site: http://www.error-ref.com/?s=finningThe fin is very small in the image. But when the raise off the rim, then circulation can flatten them. |
|
Page 2 of 2
|
Replies: 21 / Views: 2,695 |
Page 2 of 2
|
First Page
Posted 06/19/2016 10:41 am
