Steel die for 1914-15 Star for sale on eBay

[Steve Goodall]

Interesting piece of history for a collector…

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/204077247478?hash=item2f83f3abf6:g:4GoAAOSwMn1jB6kQ&amdata=enc%3AAQAHAAAAoHRsCio0hOec8l7DBK12JlGWTabQXIbvBpOuiBRLych8aR%2F6IN%2BBIW9XNVksPG6G64l8HNNEd5zckMSQ5fkhjKMdr4sZy89vtYfI44nvPfmpALLYH8C3T7K%2BgLmQ1rMPQwt%2F%2BLb4WKKITHTo3z6Ojvxt5qEjFdKNVKCUY2mPV64XovVyv8dkQolfHeJzOB1%2FnBNFLBeyLJz1h0RsgCKMMmQ%3D|tkp%3ABk9SR-am0N3eYA

[58 Div Mule]

Let’s hope it goes to someone who values it for its history rather than its potential to deceive?

58 DM.

[RNCVR]

Sold for 276 pounds.

[Ivor Anderson]

Another image for posterity.

"Engraved “No. 17” this is one of the original 56 dies produced by the Royal Mint circa 1920 which struck circa 2,350,000 issued medals post WWI. Measures 55mm in height, 75mm in diameter and weighs 2kg."

[charlie962]

What did the other half look like?

[Ivor Anderson]

I imagine this being placed into a large press to produce the stars under pressure, rather than being a mould?

Edited 3 September , 2022 by Ivor Anderson

[TEW]

Must confess I thought the medals were cast in a mould. The 14-15 Star was made from Tombac Bronze which is 92% copper so would presumably be soft enough to press in a die although a blank medal would have to be cast first in order to fit into the die?

TEW

[TullochArd]

17 minutes ago, TEW said:

Must confess I thought the medals were cast in a mould.

That was my understanding too.  The die in the OP would produce a negative which suggests it was used in some way to create a mould for casting rather than being used to stamp blanks.  

The casting process for bronze medals is described here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL919mY28fk

 

[Ivor Anderson]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2307443/Medal-maker-300-year-old-regalia-firm-craftsmen-make-awards-adorn-bravest-soldiers.html

Edited 3 September , 2022 by Ivor Anderson

[charlie2]

25 minutes ago, TullochArd said:

The die in the OP would produce a negative

Look carefully its a bit of an optical illusion,  it would produce a positive.

Charlie

[TullochArd]

1 hour ago, charlie2 said:

Look carefully its a bit of an optical illusion,  it would produce a positive.

Charlie

You are quite right.  The die is a negative and would produce a positive. 

I'm still in favour of it being used in some way to produce moulds for casting rather than as a die for stamping.

[RussT]

9 minutes ago, TullochArd said:

I'm still in favour of it being used in some way to produce moulds for casting rather than as a die for stamping.

I think you will find that casting has two important drawbacks for producing WW1 campaign medals.

It is quite a lengthy process requiring quite a bit of manual intervention (see the video in link above), which is unsuited for when very large production runs are needed, as is the case for WW1 medals

It also produces a rather poor definition even with fine good quality sands - this is not so obvious when the medal/medallion is reasonable large in size - also a feature of the example in the video.

What we have depicted here is a die which is used to strike medals of this type - a process which has been around for a long time and is a well-established technology even before WW1.

The die took a blank, which itself is stamped from long lengths of sheet having the appropriate thickness. The sheet is formed by hot and cold rolling to produce the metal in a condition which is right for striking the medal itself. The dies come from the Royal Mint and were from steels that have a composition and heat treatment that produce an item extremely resistant to wear - important because they needed to produce many 1000s of near perfect exact replicants. The whole process lends itself to being automated and rapid, which is needed given the quantity required at acceptable costs

Regards

Russ

[charlie962]

V.interesting. the die in the photo could be used to strike but I imagine now shows signs of wear?

As badge collectors know, restrikes from original dies are very difficult to detect once they have aged.

[GWF1967]

1 hour ago, RussT said:

I think you will find that casting has two important drawbacks for producing WW1 campaign medals.

It is quite a lengthy process requiring quite a bit of manual intervention 

It also produces a rather poor definition even with fine good quality sands - 

Russ

Agreed.
Definitely a die for high pressure stamping. Fast and efficient with easy quality control. 
 Casting is far move wasteful in energy, materials and manpower and is a much harder process to control. 
 I worked as an aluminium die caster. We operated all steel, hydraulic dies, with good definition (dry ice blast cleaned each shift, faces non-stick spray coated) casting V8 inlet manifolds and sumps.
2 gallons/ 9 litres, 670*C, carried and poured by hand. 
 The upper and lower “cores” of the die had built in “runners” for excess flow around the internal mould, as the die has to be overfilled (by up to 50%) to ensure no unevenness or air bubbles (inclusions) in the casting. This excess “flash” then has to be removed, before final fit, finish and polish.
Dies and metal must be kept  within a heat range to control flow rates. Speed of pour had to be constant, controlled and consistent.

 

 

[Bob Davies]

7 hours ago, TullochArd said:

I'm still in favour of it being used in some way to produce moulds for casting rather than as a die for stamping.

Here is a link to British Pathe news showing how they made them in 1946. As a pattern maker, die sinker and tool maker  myself I know that this equipment and technology was available prior to the Great War. Also another point to bear in mind is that you need one of these or something very similar to rest each medal in while you hand stamp the recipients details on the flat back, to help stop distortion of the medal and to speed up production. The medal is blanked out of the long strip which would include the hole in the loop for the ribbon, edit here; Having thought about it a follow on tool would probably be a better option here to form the loop. Basically the strip of metal is fed into the die set, the hole is blanked out first, then the strip is advanced a certain amount, then the medal shape is blanked out around the hole as it were and also at the same time another hole is blanked out for the next medal blank. (Possibly anneal the blank before the next process) Then into the die to produce the design and then into the trimming die to cut off excess metal/flash. Regards, Bob. link here;

 

Edited 3 September , 2022 by Bob Davies

[TullochArd]

6 hours ago, Bob Davies said:

Here is a link to British Pathe news showing how they made them in 1946........

You've convinced me.  Many thanks.

[Bob Davies]

20 hours ago, TullochArd said:

You've convinced me.  Many thanks.

Happy to help, it has informed me too. Looking at the die, it is not deeply engraved, yet when struck, clipped and finished it gives a good impression and looks quite three dimensional. When the flat punch comes down on the blank which splurges it into the patterned die there will be quite a lot of flash around the edges necessitating the use of the clipping tool. The flat punch will not come into contact with the die probably stopping about 1/16th of an inch (or a bit less) from it which forms the thickness of the medal. The weight of the top punch cannot splurge the metal blank any flatter due to physics and good die design. Having never seen an original I don't know what they are made from, I suspect guilding metal, which is very  malleable and lends itself to this process.

Edited 4 September , 2022 by Bob Davies

[Andrew Upton]

3 hours ago, Bob Davies said:

Having never seen an original I don't know what they are made from, I suspect gilding metal, which is very  malleable and lends itself to this process.

Bronze as specified in the original Army Orders for the 1914 and 1914/15 Stars, or Bright Bronze if you take the relevant Wiki entries at their word...