Authentication of coins is frequently presenting complicated problem in numismatics practice. Metal composition only may not be enough to identify forgeries, notably when one deals with noble metals – silver, gold or electron. Isotopic ratios, providing in certain cases information regarding metallic ore source (geographical provenance), require a sample to be extracted for MS-analysis while sampling is not permissible for numismatic material in principle. To solve the problem it becomes crucial, in addition to metal’s composition, to establish the method used for a coin’s manufacturing, as forgers are rarely realizing or following the method that was used in the original historical production. Conventional visual studying under microscope is not always being enough to understand how the coin was produced while metallographic examination of polished and etched metal samples, which might provide necessary information, is not applicable here for its destructive character. Necessary information regarding manufacturing could have been extracted from residual stress analysis, but, in general, there were very few published works regarding this kind of analysis for coins, and those few did not consider any connection between manufacturing process and residual stress in metal. The expected types of residual elastic stress arisen under historically known methods of coins production (casting in hot or cold mold, striking hot or cold metal) are considered in this work. On this base, non-destructive X-rays diffraction method (Sin2Ψ-method) is offered to distinguish between various methods of manufacturing. The results may be applied in museum’s laboratory as useful criterion for authentication of coins and medals.
| Published in | Science Journal of Chemistry (Volume 9, Issue 5) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12 |
| Page(s) | 121-128 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Numismatics, Authentication, Cast Coins, Struck Coins, Residual Stress, XRD, Method of Production
| [1] | N. Pistofidis et al. “An Estimate of the Minting Method of Three Silver Coins of the 3rd Century B.C. Through their Microscopical Study” Physica B (2010), DOI: 10.1016/j.physb.2010.01.129. |
| [2] | A. Kossolapov A., L. Viazmenskaya “Application of X-ray Diffraction Analysis for the Identification of Manufacturing Method for Silver-made Museum Objects”, Soobschenia Gosudarstvennogo Ermitajha, 1974, XXXIX, 68-70 (in Russian, English abstract). |
| [3] | Ryouichi Yokoyama, Yoshihiro Takahashi Investigation for the Forgery of the Old Coin with X-Ray Residual Stress Measurement. Journ. Soc. Mat. Sci. Japan, v. 65, No 12, pp. 877-882, Dec. 2016. |
| [4] | Rigaku Residual Stress Analysis Group. https://alexzevalkink.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/gens_khp2_00009_eng1.pdf |
| [5] | Y. Xie, L. Lutterotti, H.-R. Wenk, and F. Kovacs, “Texture analysis of ancient coins with TOF neutron diffraction”, Journ. Materials Science, 39 (10): 3329-3337, 2004. |
| [6] | Kossolapov A. J., Chugunova K. S. “Residual Stress in Struck and Cast Coins”, Insight- Non Destructive Testing and Condition Monitoring”, V. 62, No 3, 139-144, March 2020. |
| [7] | Harold P. Klug, Leroy. E. Alexander “X-Ray Diffraction procedures for Polycrystalliine and Amorphous Materials”, John Willey & Sons, NY, 1974, pp. 960. |
| [8] | Internationa lCentre for Diffraction Data (ICCD) PDF-4+ 2021/ |
| [9] | Scott A. Speakman “Estimating Crystalline Size Using XRD” http://prism.mit.edu/xray/oldsite/crystalsizeanalysis.pdf |
| [10] | Kirino Famiyoshi et al. “Researching of Producing Techniques of Koban and Ginban manufacturing in Edo Era” (in Jaanese. with English summary), Journ. Japan. Inst. Metals@Materials, 2019, 83 (5), 148-156. |
| [11] | Kirino Famiyoshi et al.” Production Techniques of Coin-type Medal Rewarding Contributions Manufacturing in the Momoyama-era””, Journ. Japan. Inst. Metals@Materials, 2017, 81 (3), 101-108. |
| [12] | M. E. Fitzpatrick, A. T. Fry et al. “Determination of Residual Stresses by X-ray Diffraction (Issue 2)” https://www.npl.co.uk/gpgs/residual-stresses-xray-diffraction |
APA Style
Alexander Joseph Kossolapov, Ksenia Sergeevna Chugunova. (2021). Residual Elastic Stress in Historical Coins as a Criterion for Authentication. Science Journal of Chemistry, 9(5), 121-128. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12
ACS Style
Alexander Joseph Kossolapov; Ksenia Sergeevna Chugunova. Residual Elastic Stress in Historical Coins as a Criterion for Authentication. Sci. J. Chem. 2021, 9(5), 121-128. doi: 10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12
AMA Style
Alexander Joseph Kossolapov, Ksenia Sergeevna Chugunova. Residual Elastic Stress in Historical Coins as a Criterion for Authentication. Sci J Chem. 2021;9(5):121-128. doi: 10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12,
author = {Alexander Joseph Kossolapov and Ksenia Sergeevna Chugunova},
title = {Residual Elastic Stress in Historical Coins as a Criterion for Authentication},
journal = {Science Journal of Chemistry},
volume = {9},
number = {5},
pages = {121-128},
doi = {10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjc.20210905.12},
abstract = {Authentication of coins is frequently presenting complicated problem in numismatics practice. Metal composition only may not be enough to identify forgeries, notably when one deals with noble metals – silver, gold or electron. Isotopic ratios, providing in certain cases information regarding metallic ore source (geographical provenance), require a sample to be extracted for MS-analysis while sampling is not permissible for numismatic material in principle. To solve the problem it becomes crucial, in addition to metal’s composition, to establish the method used for a coin’s manufacturing, as forgers are rarely realizing or following the method that was used in the original historical production. Conventional visual studying under microscope is not always being enough to understand how the coin was produced while metallographic examination of polished and etched metal samples, which might provide necessary information, is not applicable here for its destructive character. Necessary information regarding manufacturing could have been extracted from residual stress analysis, but, in general, there were very few published works regarding this kind of analysis for coins, and those few did not consider any connection between manufacturing process and residual stress in metal. The expected types of residual elastic stress arisen under historically known methods of coins production (casting in hot or cold mold, striking hot or cold metal) are considered in this work. On this base, non-destructive X-rays diffraction method (Sin2Ψ-method) is offered to distinguish between various methods of manufacturing. The results may be applied in museum’s laboratory as useful criterion for authentication of coins and medals.},
year = {2021}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Residual Elastic Stress in Historical Coins as a Criterion for Authentication AU - Alexander Joseph Kossolapov AU - Ksenia Sergeevna Chugunova Y1 - 2021/09/10 PY - 2021 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12 DO - 10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12 T2 - Science Journal of Chemistry JF - Science Journal of Chemistry JO - Science Journal of Chemistry SP - 121 EP - 128 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-099X UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjc.20210905.12 AB - Authentication of coins is frequently presenting complicated problem in numismatics practice. Metal composition only may not be enough to identify forgeries, notably when one deals with noble metals – silver, gold or electron. Isotopic ratios, providing in certain cases information regarding metallic ore source (geographical provenance), require a sample to be extracted for MS-analysis while sampling is not permissible for numismatic material in principle. To solve the problem it becomes crucial, in addition to metal’s composition, to establish the method used for a coin’s manufacturing, as forgers are rarely realizing or following the method that was used in the original historical production. Conventional visual studying under microscope is not always being enough to understand how the coin was produced while metallographic examination of polished and etched metal samples, which might provide necessary information, is not applicable here for its destructive character. Necessary information regarding manufacturing could have been extracted from residual stress analysis, but, in general, there were very few published works regarding this kind of analysis for coins, and those few did not consider any connection between manufacturing process and residual stress in metal. The expected types of residual elastic stress arisen under historically known methods of coins production (casting in hot or cold mold, striking hot or cold metal) are considered in this work. On this base, non-destructive X-rays diffraction method (Sin2Ψ-method) is offered to distinguish between various methods of manufacturing. The results may be applied in museum’s laboratory as useful criterion for authentication of coins and medals. VL - 9 IS - 5 ER -
Information
Email: