1994 D Abrasion Doubling?

[Karahbell]

Is this ADR? Or DDR?

On the Reverse above the word States there are some strange marks, not sure what this is classified as.
The closest I found online is Abrasion Doubling, but my eyes are not trained yet to be sure.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/karahbell/Pennies/IMG_4967.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/karahbell/Pennies/IMG_4963.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/karahbell/Pennies/IMG_4962.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/karahbell/Pennies/IMG_4961.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/karahbell/Pennies/IMG_4971.jpg

thanks for looking

[twoyankees]

Kara, kinda looks to me like a plating issue, imho, by the way, your pics are awesome! Great job. Lets see what the Pro's have to say,:tinysmile_classes_t Tom

[Karahbell]

thanks Tom!
It is so hard to get these pictures, I hold the magnifying glass up to my 20D Cannon lens to get as close as I can. there is still so much detail left out. I got lucky with these shots, lighting was just right this time.
Karah

[twoyankees]

Your're welcome Kara, I use a digital microscope. Seems to do a good job for the most part. There are always some types of challenges to overcome when it comes to getting good shots of coins. Keep at it, you'll get better. Its a trail and error thing.:tinysmile_classes_t Tom

[hasfam]

It's a form of mechanical doubling. Most likely what is called ejection doubling, where the extra metal is pushed towards the rim when the planchet is ejected. There is some die deterioration as well, but I think what you are seeing is mostly mechanical doubling (MD).

[jfines69]

I agree with Rock on this one... MD!!!

[Maineman750]

Here is a quote from Mike Diamond on ejection doubling :"While some "ejection doubling" might be caused by the ejection process, it is visually indistinguishable from other forms of machine doubling and therefore must be lumped in together with all other forms."

Wasn't trying to be contradictory, but this thread had me thinking I had been taught something a little differently.

[mikediamond]

This is not abrasion doubling. Abrasion doubling is largely a myth. Nor is it mechanical doubling. This is plating disturbance doubling. The thin copper plating has lifted up slightly from the underlying core. The area right next to the design is highly stressed during the strike.

[Karahbell]

This is not abrasion doubling. Abrasion doubling is largely a myth. Nor is it mechanical doubling. This is plating disturbance doubling. The thin copper plating has lifted up slightly from the underlying core. The area right next to the design is highly stressed during the strike.

Interesting thanks Mike, Would you consider this 2011 coin to be PDD as well or some other kind of Doubling, the circle around the coin (like an extra border that is smaller than the original....? this coin I found last night has so many things going on with it.
http://www.lincolncentresource.net/forums/showthread.php?p=98654#post98654

[Maineman750]

Karahbell, it is all a plating issue and I'm glad Mike confirmed it...sometimes it's tough to be contradictory when your friends are involved...he doesn't have that problem:smile:

[mikediamond]

Interesting thanks Mike, Would you consider this 2011 coin to be PDD as well or some other kind of Doubling, the circle around the coin (like an extra border that is smaller than the original....? this coin I found last night has so many things going on with it.
http://www.lincolncentresource.net/forums/showthread.php?p=98654#post98654

The low, blunt ridge that parallels the design rim is a manifestation of die fatigue. It has nothing to do with disturbed or blistered plating.

[Maineman750]

Now I'm the one confused...Karahbell, can you point to the anomaly you and Mike are refering to ? I'm looking at the tops of the letters.

[hasfam]

This is not abrasion doubling. Abrasion doubling is largely a myth. Nor is it mechanical doubling. This is plating disturbance doubling. The thin copper plating has lifted up slightly from the underlying core. The area right next to the design is highly stressed during the strike.

I was under the impression, based on what I have learned in the past that any type of doubling caused during the striking of a planchet, including the feeding and ejection of the coin, is all under the umbrella of mechanical doubling. The way I understood this for so long is the plating you refer to as being disturbed was caused mechanically, more specifically, during the ejection of the coin and since it is not a hubbed doubled die, then it is MD because is was caused during the striking process.
I have created and maintain a reference catalogue of just about all your posts Mike because I learn so much when you jump in on these posts, and I'm not so bold as to contradict you, however, I can't see how my explanation of it being MD (pushed metal/plating) during the ejection is that far off or that much different from your explanation. Thanks

[mikediamond]

Machine doubling encompasses any form of doubling that occurs after the lowest point of the hammer die's downstroke and that is caused by movement of the die against the coin or vice versa. Plating disturbance doubling is not caused by die/coin movement, but by the plating lifting up from the zinc core.

I should emphasize that machine doubling does NOT encompass ejection impact doubling, which occurs well after the downstroke is completed. The latter is known only from 2000-P and 2000-D Sacagawea dollars.

[hasfam]

Thank you Mike for coming back to this thread to clear it up for me. I understand it better now.

[jallengomez]

Mike,

You said that abrasion doubling is largely a myth. Would you mind expounding upon that? Has it been determined that the cause of what was thought to be abrasion is due to something else? BTW, when I talk about abrasion doubling I'm referring to what you see in this article:

http://www.doubleddie.com/144864.html

Thanks in advance,
Jody

[mikediamond]

I said "largely" a myth. Some of the examples Wexler presents could be abrasion doubling. But the vast majority of claimed examples of abrasion doubling are die deterioration doubling or something else. Here's the problem I see with the abrasion doubling scenario:

1) Intentional die abrasion is very common but doubling that could be attributed to such activity is vanishingly rare.

2) The few cases that might conceivably fall into the abrasion doubling category typically don't show the attenuation (thinning) of the design elements that one typically associates with heavy abrasion. And very attenuated elements don't show doubling.

3) The doubling usually doesn't occur at a right angle to visible die scratches. If abrasion is the cause it should be heaviest, or entirely restricted, to parts of letters and numbers right in the path of those die scratches. For example the doubling at Lincoln's throat in the 1956-D cent is at an oblique orientation to the die scratches that are visible in the field.

Abrasion doubling, as with many coin-related theories, is largely conjectural and exists solely due to the absence of a better explanation.