Coin Community Family of Web Sites Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors
300,000 items to help build your collection! Coin, Banknote and Medal Collectors's Online Mall Royal Estate Auctions - $1 Coin AuctionsVancouvers #1 Coin and Paper Money Dealer Join Thousands of Coin, Bullion, & Money Collectors Royal Canadian Mint products, Canadian, Polish, American, and world coins and banknotes. Specializing in Modern Numismatics








Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?


This page may contain links that result in small commissions to keep this free site up and running.

Welcome Guest! Registering and/or logging in will remove the anchor (bottom) ads. It's Free!

What Happens When There Is Not Enough Lead?

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.
Author Previous TopicReplies: 7 / Views: 1,529Next Topic  
Pillar of the Community
colonialjohn's Avatar
United States
1757 Posts
 Posted 03/11/2016  4:54 pm Show Profile   Bookmark this topic Add colonialjohn to your friends list Get a Link to this Message Number of Subscribers
Particularly in a coin in a casting mold.

180X Mexico City CCC 8R. Bronzed Cast. 38.28 mm. Plain Edge. Weight irrelevant but of a 20.9 gram result.

What-Happens-When-There-Is-Not-Enough-Lead?

XRF analysis basically identified Cu (80%) and Sn (20%) with other trace elements but NO LEAD. Lead is required in a casting alloy to lower the boiling point so the mixture does not become very volatile and spits out of the casting mold.

Brief Overview describing cast English GII counterfeit 1/2d's:

Casting molds were usually made with a special "green" casting sand; this was a naturally occurring product consisting of a mixture of fine sand, clay and water. Finer, rather than course, sand was used as it would made a more accurate impression. The terminology "green " does not refer to the color of the mixture but rather to the fact that the product was not cured, that is, the mold was not baked before use. If the proper mixture was attained the wet clay would hold the mold together so baking was not necessary. However, if the mold was baked it was known as a dry mold and would also serve the purpose.

In addition to molds made of green casting sand a individual also needed access to a hearth, similar to one used by a blacksmith, where metal could be brought to a melting point. As most cast coins were coppers the majority of the metal would be copper (which has a melting point of 1083°C). Struck counterfeit coins were made of almost pure copper as copper was soft enough so that it would not destroy the dies too quickly. However cast counterfeiters added several less expensive metals, notably lead, tin and sometimes zinc. Apparently there was no standard alloy, whatever metal was available was added to the mix. Three examples from the Smith and Mossman study demonstrate the variety of alloys used; there was a 1737 George II halfpenny made from 91.3% copper, 5% lead and 3.7 tin; a 1740 George II halfpenny made from 66% copper, 25.9% zinc, 4.7% lead and 3.2% tin; and a 1775 George III halfpenny composed of 82.9% copper, 12% lead and 5.1% tin.

Because of the various mixtures of these metals there is no standard weight for cast coppers. Generally cast halfpence were in the same weight range as stamped counterfeit halfpence, namely 90-125 grains (while regal halfpence averaged about 145-155 grains). However, due to the use of heavy metals, such as lead, some cast examples equaled or even exceeded the authorized regal weight. The example given above with a 12% lead content was the heaviest halfpenny in the Smith and Mossman study weighing 172.8 grains! Among the forty cast halfpence studied by Smith and Mossman there was the following weight distribution:

78.4 grains - 1
90 to 99 grains - 6
100 to 109 grains - 9
110 to 119 grains - 6
120 to 129 grains - 5
130 to 139 grains - 6
140 to 149 grains - 2
150 to 159 grains - 3
160 to 169 grains - 1
172.8 grains - 1
This sample included the following halfpence varieties: 1 - George I; 28 - George II; 3 - George III; 3 - Irish George II, and 5 - Irish George III (generally the Irish examples were at the lighter end of the scale with the lightest example being a 1783 George III Irish halfpenny).

IMO - Cast CCC8R's are rare and if the counterfeiter forgets to add Pb - their down right RARE. Never seen a GII English GII without lead or a coin which LOSS half its mass spitting out of a casting mold.

An incredibly instructive specimen for the specialist. My most challenging specimen yet in 2016 - OBVIOUSLY. I initially assumed it was pulled out or FORMED INCORRECTLY and possibly left a good portion of metal behind in the mold.

JPL
Edited by colonialjohn
03/11/2016 5:04 pm
Rest in Peace
Buddy's Avatar
United States
7075 Posts
 Posted 03/11/2016  8:48 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Buddy to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Interesting information.

Is that Swiss-cheese appearance typical for cast counterfeits?
Moderator
Learn More...
Spence's Avatar
United States
34419 Posts
 Posted 03/11/2016  8:53 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Spence to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
@colonialjohn, I wonder if you looked at the composition via XRF at specific locations on this "coin" whether the percentage of specific alloy metals might vary as you go from the bottom (by the date) up to the top. I understand that the absence of lead led to the boiling or sputtering of the molten metal for this specific specimen and I'm wondering whether this might have led to a directional heterogeneity of the component elements.

Or maybe I'm just being a total nerd.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb

"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
Pillar of the Community
colonialjohn's Avatar
United States
1757 Posts
 Posted 03/12/2016  10:28 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add colonialjohn to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Its a good point - its always better (if possible) if you can do core to surface analysis but generally for studies like these the type of alloy never really changes but its individual quantitative metal values of course will differ in almost all cases slightly and sometimes dramatically (i.e., its tin w/o Pb from all areas of this specimen). A good example is shipwreck 8R's which eventually move toward 99% Ag and silver surface enrichment. In the J. Beck article he does measure inner/outer core values for various Ag level alloys. Results vary greatly. However the its ALWAYS the same generic alloy. Also when confirming a generic alloy multiple surface shots are ALWAYS in order during the testing.

JPL
Moderator
Learn More...
Spence's Avatar
United States
34419 Posts
 Posted 03/12/2016  12:19 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add Spence to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
ok interesting. I was thinking more about directionality on the surface from the 6 o'clock position to the 12 o'clock position rather than from the inner core to the outer surface. It seems to me that of all cast coins, this one might be more heterogeneous than others.
"If you climb a good tree, you get a push."
-----Ghanaian proverb

"The danger we all now face is distinguishing between what is authentic and what is performed."
-----King Adz
Pillar of the Community
colonialjohn's Avatar
United States
1757 Posts
 Posted 03/12/2016  12:31 pm  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add colonialjohn to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
Lead is introduced to lower the boiling point to avoid this type of situation. Its unusual as most counterfeiters KNOW this fact in the NEED for lead.

Most spot analysis revealed the same result - no lead. Again lead is usually found in concentrations of 1-5%. Rarely below 1% and sometimes higher.

Phil Mossman and his friend and colleague physicist Dr. Smith did papers on cast coinage and did all the pioneering work with these English GII/GIII cast halfpence. Most are in the GII reign as when we proceed forward in the 18thC the counterfeiters advanced their skills (so to speak) from cast to striking methods. A GIII English 1/2d in cast even for the most COMMON date is a rarity. How rare? Maybe 2-3 dozen exist for all GIII casts including even the most common year of GIII cast counterfeits - 1775. Bill Anton would never sell me one ... just for the record. Seen only around (6) or so myself but have not been looking lately.

Ironically because they are UGLY most collectors never appreciate them ... which is understandable in this world of SLAB-mania and MS examples for U.S. Federal coins listed as MS 66/67 & 68 bringing ridiculous prices. Everyone LIKES nice - obviously so it is difficult to purchase UGLY (cast specimen). This is how collectors evolve and behave most times. Who can argue.

IMO.

JPL
Edited by colonialjohn
03/12/2016 12:34 pm
Pillar of the Community
Australia
3831 Posts
 Posted 03/15/2016  08:41 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add gxseries to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
John, I must ask this question as I am not an expert in metallurgy. First of all, would you consider this to be a more modern type of counterfeit?

My reason for this is because from my impression, zinc is normally associated with lead-zinc sulfide ores and as far as I am aware, it was historically difficult to completely extract lead from zinc and or vice versa. I would be very hard press to think of any mines that produced only zinc sulfide ores. With modern flotation technology, it would be easier to separate the two however would find it difficult to believe if this was indeed cast during the early 1800s.

At the same time - wasn't lead always been a really cheap base metal unless this was a random test piece?
My partial coin collection http://www.omnicoin.com/collection/gxseries
My numismatics articles and collection: http://www.gxseries.com/numis/numis_index.htm
Regularly updated at least once a month.
Pillar of the Community
colonialjohn's Avatar
United States
1757 Posts
 Posted 03/16/2016  07:53 am  Show Profile   Bookmark this reply Add colonialjohn to your friends list Get a Link to this Reply
In terms of a cast you can never argue past last week let alone in the 19thC.. However how could something like this pass to fool collectors today or simply was made to pass for whatever it could during the time with regal issues. Unfortunately the instrument I use now is difficult to get any accuracy less than 0.5% let alone 1%. This specimen would do well to be tested in a more state of the art machine with accuracy to 0.01%. All I can say is the lead here is <1% (if present) and due to time limitations only one surface shot was taken. It did convince me it was bronze and lead probably present was extremely low - and this level of lead or no lead per see (<1%) will create a production problem for a cast bronze alloy specimen to be created properly. Some other collectors have notified me that they have seen similar DEFORMED issues in the George II 1/2d realm as with this issue. Phil Mossman's research is CRYSTAL CLEAR - you must have Pb in the 1-5% range or greater to properly cast bronze issues. This type of data is also seen of course with these CAST Chinese Cash coins. Google this and several papers with data will be outputted.
I agree 100% this piece is worthy of a more sophisticated (i.e., higher accuracy) XRF or SEM/EDS analysis.

JPL
Edited by colonialjohn
03/16/2016 07:59 am
  Previous TopicReplies: 7 / Views: 1,529Next Topic  

To participate in the forum you must log in or register.



    




Disclaimer: While a tremendous amount of effort goes into ensuring the accuracy of the information contained in this site, Coin Community assumes no liability for errors. Copyright 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Family- all rights reserved worldwide. Use of any images or content on this website without prior written permission of Coin Community or the original lender is strictly prohibited.
Contact Us  |  Advertise Here  |  Privacy Policy / Terms of Use

Coin Community Forum © 2005 - 2026 Coin Community Forums
It took 0.32 seconds to rattle this change. Forums