\Pec|er4 ee . 7 & B.LO.S. FINAL REPORT No. 614 Ke COPY No. 378 ITEM No. 18 Mo HOOFAFSKRIF No. (3 MASTER copy RESTRICTED WELDING DESIGN & FABRICATION OF GERMAN TANK HULLS & TURRETS be protected by British Patents or Patent applications, this publication cannot be held to give any protection against action for infringement. RESTRICTED BRITISH INTELLIGENCE OBJECTIVES SUB-COMMITTEERESTRICTED WELDING DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF GERMAN TANK HULLS AND TURRETS Reported by jor R.J. Fowler, ReE. Fighting Vehicles Design Department BIOS Trip No: 707 BIOS Target Nos: 18/23, 18/83, 18/620. Armoured Fighting Vehicles RESTRICTED BRITISH INTELLIGENCE OBJECTIVES SUB-COMMITTEE: 32, Bryanston Squero, London, We 1.il 2. 3 WELDING DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF GERMAN TANK HULLS AND TURRETS LIST_OF CONTENTS Introduction Conclusions Discussion As Armour Welding Specifications Be Development and Design of Welded Joints (4) Main Welded Armour Joints (44) Survey of Development of armour Joints (444) Reference to Plug Joints in Specification T.Le21/9017 (iv) Introduction of Interlock Joints on P2.KweIV (v) Introduction of Interlock Joints on Tiger and Panther series (vi) Maus (vii) Ballistic advantages of Interlocking Construction (viii) Attectment of Armour Components end Structural parts (ix) Responsibility for Design C. Indication of Welds on Drawings De Welding Electrodes for Armour (4) History (ii) Estimation of Quantities (iid) Electrode Makes and Sizes Used (iv) Experiences in Production Shops Page Now 25~26RESTRICTED WELDING DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF GERMAN TANK HULLS AND TURRETS Reported by lor R.J. Fowler, R.E. Fighting Vehicles Design Department BIOS Trip No: 707 BIOS Target Nos: 18/23, 18/83, 18/62a. B.I.0.8. List Item 18 4rmoured Fighting Vehicles RESTRICTED BRITISH INTELLIGENCE OBJECTIVES SUB=COMMITTEE, 52, Bryanston Squere, London, W. 1.i. 2. 3. WELDING DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF GERMAN TANK HULLS “AND TURRETS LIST_OF CONTENTS Introduction Conclusions Discussion A» Armour Welding Specifications B. Development and Design of Welded Joints (4) Main Welded Armour Joints (41) Survey of Development of Armour Joints (444) Reference to Plug Joints in Specification TeLe21/9017 (4v) Introduction of Interlock Joints on Pz.Kw.IV (v) Introduction of Interlock Joints on Tiger and Panther series (vi) Maus (vid) Ballistic advantages of Interlocking Construction (viii) Attachment of Armour Components and Structural parts (ix) Responsibility for Design C. ‘Indication of Welds on Drawings De Welding Electrodes for Armour (4) History (4i) Estimation of Quantities (iii) Electrode Makes and Sizes Used (iv) Experiences in Production Shops Page No. 1-4 Br 1-58 8 -22E. F. Ge x. (y) Influence of Electrode Availability on Design (vi) Storage end Salvage of Electrodes Preparation of Armour Plate for Welding (4) Gas cutting (ii) Flattening and Bending (441) Cleanliness of Plates before Welding Layout of Production Lines (4) _DeHeHeVe Hulls for Panther and Tiger IT (ii) D.H.E.V. Turrets for " i * (444) Fs Krupp Hulls for Tiger II Assembly Jigging and Manipulation of Hulls and Turrets (4) General (44) Assembly of Panther Hyll at D.H.H.V. (443) " "Tiger II Hull at DeHH.V. and P, Krupp (iv) Extent of Tack welding (v) Assembly of Penther and Tiger II Turrets (vi) The Influence of Interlock Construction on Assembly (vit) Manipulation of Panther and Tiger IT Hulls and Turrets (viii) Manipulators used for Panther and Tiger II (4x) Jigs end Manipulators for Pz.Kw.IV Lower Hull at F. Krupp Welding Techniques and Procedures Now 26 26 27-29 27-28 29 30-32 30=31 31 31-32 32-h1 32 32-35 35 35-36 36 38 38-39 L247(i) General (44) Krupp Procedure for Welding Tiger IT Hull (ii4) Krupp Procedure for Welding Tiger II Turret (iv) Welding Procedures for Panther at D.H.H.V. (v) Welding Procedures at DEW. (vi) Standard Welding Procedures I. Heat Treatment of Hulls and Turrets J. Production Rates and Mmes (4) rs mee Production (43) D.H.H.V. Production (444) D.H.H.V. Panther Hulls (iv) _D-H-E.V. Panther Turrets (v) -D.HH.V. Tiger II Hull (vi) Plate Preparation D.H.H.V. K. Quality of Workmanship (4) Inspection (44) Qualification of Operators (414) Gaps in Welded Joints (iv) Gaps in Interlock Joints (v) Generel Remarks 4, Acknowledgements Page No. 46-47 Y7-YB 48-55 49-50 50-53 55-54, 5hn55 56-58 ” 57-58LIST OF FIGURES Noe ke Le Ue 156 16. le 18. 21. 226 230 Hull, Eight Wheeled Armoured Car S.D.Ktz 23h/3 Nose interlock joint S.D.Kfz 234/3 Tiger I Turret at D.H.H.V. Panther I G Turret Assembly Jig DeHeH.V. & Tiger TI Turret Assembly Jig D.H.H.V. & Tiger II Turret part assembled, Fe Krupp . . " ” " 2 . s = DeHeHeVe . * 4n manipulator F. Krupp Penther Turret " " D.H.H.V. Tiger II ana Panther Hull Assexbly and Welding = Shop D.H«H.V. & Tiger II and Panther Floor Sub-assembly Jig and Manipulator DeH.E.V. & Tiger II and Panther Assembly of Lower Side plates D-E.H.V. Penther Hull Front Plug Joints before inserting Packs D.H.H.V. Penther Hull Front Plug Joints after inserting Packs D.HeH.V. Panther Hull ~ Front End of Hull in Jig D.H.HeVe ‘Tiger II Hull - Front End of Hull in Jig Del.HeVe & Tiger II Hull = Assembly of Lower Plates in Jig Pe Krupp age Nos 59 S IQ RR & 69 7o 70Fige Noe Page No. 2h. & Tiger II Hull - Assembled and teck welded n 25. External views Fe Krupp 26. & Tiger II Hull - Assembled and tack welded 02 27. Internal views 28. Tiger II Hull - Rear Plug Joints before 3B Anserting Packs F. Krupp 29. Tiger II Hull - Finel drive Protection Armour B showing unwelded pack F. Krupp 30, Tiger II Hull - Upper side to Front Plate Th Joint showing unwelded pack D.H.H.V. 31. Tiger II Hull - Nose Joint before packing Th F. Krupp 32. Panther Photomacrographs of packs in plug a5 Joint 33+ & Tiger II Hull Manipulators DeHeH.V. 76 Ble 35,36,Tiger II Hull Manipulator Brackets F, Krupp 7 37,38. 39. ‘Tiger II Hull Manipulator on Tracks ¥. Krupp 78 40. Panther Hull in Static Manipulator D.H.H.V. 78 41. Tiger II Hull Menipulator with Welders’ 79 platform and plant ~ F. Krupp 42, Tiger IL Upper Front Plates finish Gas Cut - 19 F. Krupp 43. & PasKweIV Lower Hull Assembly Jig - F. Krupp 80 Lhe 45. & Pe-Kw.IV Lower Hull Tilting Ring Manipulator - 81 46. F. Krupp 47. & PaeKw.IV Lower Hull Tilting Cradle Menipuletor - 82 48. F. Krupp 49. & Maus Hull = - F. Krupp 8 HD. 51. & Meus Turret - FP. Krupp a 52.LIST _OF APPENDICES Tentative Specification for the Design and Fabrication of Armour Parts ~ T.L.21/9017 Repart of Meeting, Sub-camittee IIe on Armour Welding 6th May, 1942 Notes on the Firing Trial of a B.W. Lower Hull at Kumersdorf Correspondence concerning Gas Cutting end Interlock Joint Construction Correspondence concerning Gaps in Welded Joints Panther Hyll and Turret Electrode Consumption check at D.HeH.V. Panther Hull and Turret Assembly sequence instructions = D.H.H.V. Correspondence concerning total austenitic and ferritic electrode requirements for German Tank production Instructions concerning the indication of Welds on drawings Comparison of Tiger II assembly sequences at D.H.H.V. ond F. Krupp F. Krupp - Directions for Work upon Armour "Family tree" of German Tank Production Industrial Commission Output of Panther Hulls ~ D.HeH.V. = Chart Teble, summarising history of introduction Arm of the various types of German Armour Welded. Jointsow OW Oo Tiger II Hull Main Joint Details Tiger II Attachment of Parts Panther I.G. Hull Main Joint Details Layout of Production Lines Tiger II Hull, Main Manipulator Brackets, DEH.V. Welding Operation Sequences and Timing Schedules, Panther I.G. - D.H.H.V. Three Sheetst= INTRODUCTION The development of welded armour in Germany has been followed with interest by the Welding Brench of the Fighting Vehicles Design Department, information being obtained fran mills and turrets of enemy tanks snd armoured cars captured in the Field and examined by the Department. Liaison was maintained with the Tank Automotive Centre, Detroit, Us§.Ae and early in 1945, Capt. John Fe Randall, U.S. Ordnance, and Major L.F. Denaro of the Welding Branch, F.V.D.D., reconnoitred for exploitation enemy welding targets of interest. The British Tank Armour Welding Mission was organised by F.V.D.De 2s S00n as assessment reports of the various industrial plants were collatea by Group V, C.1.0.S, The Mission included officers of the Department responsible for welding research, design and fabrication of British Amour welded hulls and turrets and leading technical personnel of the British firms who were responsible for the development of armour welding electrodes and gas cutting plant. : The personnel of the Mission was as follows: - Major L.F. Denaro > F.V.D.D. Team Leader Welded A.F.V- Hull and Turret Design and Fabrication Mr. E.P.S. Gardner - F.V.D.D. Major ReJ. Fowler - = Capt. DeL. Sidney - " Gas Cutting and Welding Group Mr. He Inman - B.V.D.D. Mr. F.S, Williamson - a Mr. RS. Doré - British Oxygen Go. Ltd. Mr. L.J Hancocie - Hancock & Co. (Engineers) Lta. Mr. 0.5. Milne - CS. Milne & Co.Ltd, Armour Electrode Group Mr. JL. Hamilton Mr. E.F. Newell Dr. B.C. Rollason Messrs. Rockweld Ltd. QuasimAre Co.Ltd. Murex Welding Processes Ltd. Metropolitan Vickers Blectrical Cobtd,=2- The present report is on the welding Design and Fabrication of German Tank Hulls and Turrets. Separate reports are being issued covering the other aspects of the Mission as follows:- (a) German Research and Development of Tenk Armour Welding by Major LF. Denaro, RB. Published as CIOS File No.XXX111-10 (b) cecaes Are are) Weraing Electrodes and their ‘acture by Major L.F. Denaro, R.E., De E.Ce Rollason, Mre JeLe Hamilton, Mr. E.F. Newell and Mr. He West Published as C10S File No.Xxx111-12 (c) German Gas Welding and Cutting Industry by the Ges Cutting Investigating Team A separate and valuable report on "Welding of Germen Armoured Vehicles" by Capte John F. Randall, UsS-F.EeT. has already been issued covering the targets investigated by that officer between irda March and 25th Mey, 1945. The following report covers a more restricted mmber of targets, visited between 23rd July and 4th August, 1945, which were:~ 18/23 1. Frie@rich Krupp, 4.G. Essen (Ruhr), Germany 18/83 2. + Dortmund Hoerder A.V. (Werk Hoerde), Hoerde (Ruhr), Germany 18/62a. 3. Deutsche Edelstahlwerke A.G. Willich, Germany Vehicle production lines where existing were examined and the personnel who were available were interrogated. Documents and drawings examined and evacuated were largely of a disconnected nature es the great majority, according to the German employees, were either destroyed on orders by fire, or else removed by pre~ vious investigators. Free use has been made in this report of photographs taken during the investigation, and of translated documents reproduced as appendices in order to convey to the reader a true impression of the design principles, fsbrication end production methods fol- lowed on the German A.F.Vs. investigated. ‘The drawings produced at Appendices 0 and P have been adapted from German design drawings previously evacuated, and held by the School of Tank Technology. The drawings showing production arrange- ments have been adapted from Works drawings and sketches evacuated dy the investigating teem. This has been done in order to illus- trate only the salient points and thus to economise in spece. This report has been published as C105 Final Report No. XX1x-44.Eutten- Werk Hoerde Deutsche} Bdel- stahl Werk 1h It Willich Works Asphaltier- anlage I.G. and Tiger II Panther I.¢. and Tiger II Saktz 231,/ 3 (Bight Wheeled Armoured Car) order evacuated ‘by occupy— ing Allied ‘troops Personnel Interrogated Research Engineer Electrode qual- ity Welding Techniques Dr. Wasmaht Director of Quality end Ch. Metallurgist Dre Becker Welding Engineer Dr. Scherer Techl.Director Herr Kox VWelding Engineer Willichone Little mention has been made of the. design and febrication methods of SdeKfz 234/3 at Deutsche Bdelstehlwerke, in this report as no docu- mentary evidence was obtained. Arrangements have been made, however, for a hull to be evacuated to F.V.D.D. for detailed metallurgical and design examination by the Welding Branch. Photographs Figs. 1 end 2 show the construction layout of the forward hull section and the inter- lock joint in the nose, referred to later. Reference is made in the body of the report and in the appendices to certain individuals who were members of the industriel commissions which were responsible to the German Army authorities for development, design and supply in the various branches of tenk production, A section of the fanily tree of this organization dated 26/10/42 is reproduced in Appendix L end covers the two sub-camittees "I-k" and Il.e" responsible for electrodes, and Development of Armour Welding respectively. It is of interest to note that the meubership of these orgeniza- tions was limited to the leading technical representatives of the firms concerned, snd they must have materially forwarded the design end production of German tenks. The fact that only technical personn~ el sat on the camittees is reflected in the detail in which they dis- cussed the various problems associated with design and production. ‘A translation of the minutes of the armour welding sub-comittee "II.e" meeting for 6th May, 1942 is appended at B. ‘This illustrates the careful nature of the discussions even though, in the opinion of the author, correct reasoning and conclusions are not always dram. The subject matter of this meeting report throws an interesting Light on the German thought on a number of problems connected with welding armour and is, therefore, reproduced in full. Attempts were made to locate for interrogation Oberat Reus head of the section of the Heereswaffenamt, Wa Prif 6/IIb with whan the industriel commissions dealt, but these were unsuccessful It is strongly recomended thet this metter be pursued in order that the Official German views, particularly on the question of interlock construction may be obtained.“5 CONCLUSIONS A. Welding Specifications The German specifications covering the welding of armour were issued es (1) controlling the detail design and febrication of indivi- dual armour parts, end (2) a series, controlling amour structures made with various plate thicknesses. The latter deals more fully with welding workmanship end procedure, than does the former. Be Deve: t_and Des: of Welded Joints In 1942 joint design changed from rebated or ‘stepped’ joints to interlock and plug joints for all except the floor ana roof joints to sides, front and rear, Evidence points to the fact that this chenge was made, firatly, in order to econamise in machine tools by using gas-cutting, end secondly, although there is no definite proof of this, to give an increase in ballistic resistance. . C. Indication of Welds on Drawings A standard nomenclature which specified the throat thickness of eny weld, whether butt weld or fillet weld, was used throughout the ware This suffered from drawbacks in inspection caused by the incorrect representation af welds on Grawings, until attention was drew to it in 1945. De Welding Electrodes for Armour The Germans had three main phases of types of electrodes in uses Until 1942 ferritic end hard surfacing electrodes were in the main used with certain firms epplying austenitic electrodes. From 1942 to early 1944 eustenitic electrodes were used throughout with herd surfacing electrodes prohibited, and finally, due to the shortage of alloying elements, ferritic electrodes, replacing a large proportion of austenitic electrodes, were specified in Jan.19i. EB. Preparation of Armour Plate for Welding With interlock construction a large proportion of plete pre- paration was cerried out with gas-cutting, and the use of machining was restricted by order to the preparation of rebated joints. There was no indication of any attempt to clean the surface of armour plate at the works visited. The standerd of workmanship for gas~cutting was not required by specification to be of the high level common in this country, and attention is dram to the excess- ive sizes permitted for such defects as fluting. F. Layout of Production Lines The Fe Krupp and DeHsH.V. production lines for Tiger II and Panther were of interest, as the former employed mobile manipule- tors which progressed along the welding lines, whilst the latterused a large mmber of static manipulators placed transversely in Line; otherwise production lines followed orthodox principles. Ge Ass J: end tion of Hulls and Turrets It is not thought that the interlock construction offered eny advantages over the orthodox construction in esseubly of hulls end turrets, mainly because of the wide tolerances to which profiling was carried out. Assembly fixtures were no less complicated than those in this country when a similar type was used. Considerable time wes spent in fitting and meking adjustments during assembly. Manipulation af hulls and turrets for welding of Panther and Tiger ‘wes carried out using rotation about the longitudinal axis only. These manipulators were of simple and effective design. He Welding Techniques and Procedures Little evidence was availeble on detailed welding procedures, but it appeared from discussions that only where distortions were concerned, such as in hull roof plates and turret floors which affected later asseubly work, was care taken to adopt definite welding procedures. Otherwise, it appeared, procedures were sub- ordinated to a minimm mmber of rotations cf the manipulators. I. Heat Treatment of Hulls and Turrets No heat treatment of hulls and turrets was required on Panther and Tiger II, but it was wed for bulls of thinner plate; mainly by Deutsche Edelstahlwerk. Je Production Rates and Times Dats concerning output rates and operation times is included under this heading, but no attempt ie made to compare these figures with Allied practice. Attention is drawn to the large percentage of time allowed for welding repairs after hulls and turrets are completed. K Quality of Workmanship Although many instructions and decisions were made, from fairly high levels concerning various details of workmanship, it did not appear that they were effectively enforced at the works visited. Examination of pert-welded and fully-welded hulls and turrets showed many defective welds, and it was presumsbly because of this that such a large amount of repair time for making good these defects was allowed in production schedules. Gap dimensions were rigidly defined by specification, but due to the excessive tolerances used in profiling, it was clearly not possible for then to be maintained. In interlock construction where packs were specified to be of tight fit and hammered into position, it often resulted that packs were quite loose and samtimes tightened with thin shims, thus defeating the ballistic aspect of their design.=e A. Armour Welding Specifications 4s far as can be ascertained there was only one specification specifically controlling the welding of armour. This specification TeL. 21/9017 was issued on 2ist May, 1942 with latest revision dated 20th August, 1942, and was still in force even though it was a tente- tive specification, at the end of hostilities. It is reproduced, es translated by Capt. Randall at Appendix A, and served as a model to the Krupp armour welding instructions entitled "Directions for Work upon Armour" issued 28th July, 19k. T.Le 21/9017 rather strongly includes clauses controlling the tolerances on bolt and rivet hole centres and details af tapped holes, but does not make reference to quality of welding worknanship or the approval of welding procedures and operators. Another series of specifications, T.L.401}, 4028 and 4032 entitled “fentative Specification for armour Structures with Wall Thicknesses 16-30 mm, 35-50 m., and 55-80 mm. respectively" have limited welding requirements. These are summarised by Capt. Randall as follows:- 1. Metal arc welding to be used unless otherwise directed on the drawings. 2. A written welding procedure has to be produced and spproved by Wa Priif 6 before starting production. Any changes necessitate a new approval. 3. A list of the factors considered to be included in the welding process end is as follows:- ¢) Joint design yb) Electrode materials and diameters ©) Sequence of passes Stress relieving methods ©) Type Current and polarity of D.C. t) Amperage 4e No oracking is permitted in finished welds. 5» No ballistic test of welded structures is required. There was presumably a similer specification covering structures in plate thicknesses above 8 mm, but no evidence became available thet it existed. The requirements of these specifications are dealt with in the eppropriate sections of this repurt.Be (4) (44) =o it and Design of Welded Joints Main Welded Armour Joints The most pronounced difference in welded joint design between Western Allied and German tenks is that the latter developed a system of mechanical interlock for use mainly on their heavy vehicles. In pre-war days they commenced the welding of hulls and turrets using a combined fillet and butt welded construction. This was followed by the stepped or rebated joint. Later, the notch interlock ana plug Joints were developed for use on the Tiger and Panther series of vehicles, although both were used on late Pz.KweIV vehicles and the notch interlock alone on the eight wheeled armoured car SdeKfz 234/3. In the two latter cases the notch interlock was used on plate thicknesses of 20 m. and 30 mm. respectively. Other mechanical locking devices were used on prototype and production vehicles, in addition to the plug and notch interlock Joints. On the super heavy vehicle, Maus, designed by F. Krupp, dowel pins were inserted through interlock joints. Tiger I incorporated a double rebated joint, and a combined rebated and keyed constructions Survey of the Development of Armour Joints The teble, Appendix N, swmerises the history of the introduction of the various kinds of welded joints. The dates of the vehicles’ going into production are given as nearly as can be ascertained, comencing with the Pz. Kw.II. It is seen that up to 1936 neither the rebated nor interlock types of joint had been used in German A.F.V. design, On the PzeKweII all Joints were of an orthodox welded construction modified for protection. The rebated Joint was first used on the Pz.Kw.ITI and IV hull, nose transverse joints, and rear plate to side plate joints, and on the turret front to side plate joints. The protected single vee butt with fillet sealing weld joint was used for turret front to roof plate joints on these vehicles end was still used on the latest designs for Tiger II turret.SS5 (444) Reference to Joints in Specification 7 (av) That the German Heeresweffenamt hed already envisaged the use of interlock notch and plug type joints as a general practice in Jmgust "2 is cleer from Specification T.L.21/9017 Appendix A. Clause Ash, concerning sizes of gaps, refers to notch joints and states that the gap widths permitted apply only to such joints "welded with austenitic electrodes". (The reason for this lest condition is not explained). Clause B.4 refers to plug Joints and the use of tight fitting plugs and packed plugs. This is, perhaps, an indication that such joints have been developed irrespective of the methods of making them, that they were not used for ease of manufacture but for a constructional reason, 1.e. to increase resistance to attack or = doubtful = to assist assexbly. On examination of weld sizes, para Be5, it is seen that the weld size is dependent on plate thickness, and no reference is made to joint detail or joint design. ‘This At ds submitted is an indication that although a higher strength may be obtained with interlocks, the weld size would remain as for en alternative construction not incor~ poreting interlockss Cne could infer from this that interlocks were not developed to econcmise in weld metsl on the basis that interlock construction provided greater strength with less dependence on welding. Introduction of Interlock Joints on P: IV In March 1942, when the Pz.KweIV was the heaviest vehicle in production (Tiger I was then about to come into production), considerable discussion end corres- pondence arose over rebated joint manufacture and alter- natives that could be used by adopting gas cutting to avoid the machining required on the former. The nose plate of the Pz.Kw.1V had then been thickened up to 80 mm. Extracts fran such corresponience between Rohiland, head of the main commissicn for A.F.V. production and Oberat Reu of Wa Priif 6 are given at sppendices C and D.= 10F=) That at Appendix C is an official repart and cament, “Testing of a BeWe Hull at Kumersdorf (proving ground) on 3rd March, '42", A lower hull structure of the BW. vehicle (Pz.Kw.IV) had been built by Krupp incorporating interlock joints between the glacis and nose and side plates instead of rebated, and a plug joint between nose and side plates. All these joints were made from gas cut plates. Further, therebated side to floor plate joint was changed to a simple overlap of the floor on the lower edge of the side plate. It is considered that the comments made concerning the glacis plate being deflected downwards under attack fran 3.7 cme and 5 ame AsP. shot and the consequent condema- tion of the interlock joints to side plates overlooked thet as the glacis plate was only 20 mm. thick it would have deflected downwards similarly whatever the Joint to the side plates might be. No cament need be made here concerning the production savings claimed es these are quite clearly given in Rohlané's observations on gas cutting Appendix D (b). Attention is drawn, however, to the statements regarding the relief on the use of slotting and planing machines, and to the five proposals made by Rohland at the conclusion of his observations. It is quite apparent fram these that there wes no thought of turning to interlock construction on the MkeIV in order to increase the strength of joints. It wes solely to speed up and effect economy in the pre- paration of plates for welding by the use of ges cutting instead of machine tools. Avwora might be said with regard to the references to austenitic and ferritic electrodes in this correspondence. As Rohland stated, the use of these was independent of the question of gas cutting. The severe conditions of the Russian winter hed caused much ferritic welding cracking and the proposal wes-to substitute the tougher and more resistant to cold, austenitic electrodes, for the more comonly used ferritice This matter is dealt with fully by Major Denaro, R.E. in his report on German Research and Development in Tank Armour Welding. The fact that the Army authorities confused the use of ges cutting with the austenitic v. ferritic electrodes issue, and that they dia’not think the production advantages worth- while, or the re-training of welders warranted, (even though this letter was not necessary), is surely proof that the new(v) Saree! method of construction with interlock joints was not introduced primarily for strength or ballistic resistance reasons. Introduction of Interlock Joints on Tiger and Panther Series (a) Tiger I The Tiger I was introduced into production in the Autwm of 1942 and probably design wes initiated about a yeor earlier, ieee the middle of 1941. The hull incorporates plug joints on the side plates to front end rear plates connections, to- gether with a keyed plug joint combined with a rebated joint visor to glecis plate. This latter was obviously en attempt to prevent the glecis plate separating from the vizor and so losing the support of the rebated joint. In this case the joint mst be considered largely mechanical. a The turret had 2 plug type Joint between the upper and lower front plates, which were wedged in position and then welded around. An illustration of a partly completed turret is shom in photograph Fig. 3. This partioular turret hed been con- emned by the army inspector and had been left standing in the hmll production line at D.H.H.V. for some months prior to the end cf the War. The reason for condemnation was not stated. It is of interest to note that the front sloping roof plate'of these turrets was cerried cn a rebated support on the front and sides, whereas the flat portion of the roof (in the horseshoe shaped part of the turret) was welded with the protected single vee butt weld. In no instance on this vehicle wes the notch interlock used to replace the machined grooves for rebated jointse (b) Panther I.G. and Tiger II The armour of the hulls of these two vehicles is very similar in arrangement. ‘The joint design is also similer in principle on the latest models in production. See Drewings Appendices 0 and Q. The turrets, however, although very similer in form do net use the same types of joints. The reason for this is not apparent, although it may be that the joint design was influenced bythe plate thicknesses and the fact that the front on the Panther was cast whereas that of Tiger IT was plate, Also the vehicles were parented by different firms, and the Panther was designed earlier. Hulls (1) It is seen that the notched interlock Joints on=12= the noses of Panther I.G. and Tiger II differ in the lengths of the notch projections of the front plates uppers In the case of Panther 1.G, the two projections are considerebly shorter than those on the lower plate, whereas in Tiger II all the notch projections are of equal length. See Photographs Figs. 20 and 21. On the basis of greater weight of heavy impact or blast to be resisted on the front plate upper it may have been decided to increase the support to it, by this means in the case of Tiger II. Joints upper and lower sides to front and rear plates are all plug type, except in the case of upper side to upper front plate on both vehicles, which are notch inter locks. See Photograph Fig. 30. The packing plate used at the ends of the notches is clearly visible in this photograph. There is a different between the packing plates on the Penther and Tiger II plug joints. In the case of the lower front to sides and reer plate to sides on Fanther, the end packers to the plugs ere of semi-circuler cross section, whereas those for all the Tiger II plugs, and the front plate upper to upper side plate on Panther are the rectangular shape. Both these are in accordance with the welding specification 1.L.21/9017, Appendix A. 411 the Joints between the floor plete, pamier floor plate and roof plate to front and sides are rebated except in the case of the pannier floor to side plates, which in oth vehicles is notch interlocked, This last instance is not understood as it can provide no mechanical support against mine blast or other attack forcing the pannier floor upwards or the lower side plate inwards. Photograph Fige 26 illustrates this quite clearly. Eerlier designs of Panther had a notch interlock detail between floor and lower side plates, and presumably the upper joint on the lower side plate was made similarly for the seke of uniformity. However, when the hull floor to side plate reverted back to the rebated joint it is supposed that the upper joint was not similarly reconsidered. A plain overlap fillet welded corner joint would have been equally as efficient from all design points of view and mch more suitable for assembly than the notch interlock used.(wa) Turrets (2) I+ has been stated earlier that the turrets of Panther and Tiger II have different joint designs. In the ease of the former the front casting to side plates is notch type interlock, whereas that for the latter is rebated. The rear plate to sides on Panther is the plug type with the projection on the rear plate, whilst this joint on the Tiger is the interlock notch type, with one projection on the front plate. These differences are clearly visible on photographs Figs. Nos. 4, 7 and 9. Both turrets have curved side plates, and each are bevelled to give the protected single vee butt weld between roof and sides, ‘The roof plate joints to the front plate and casting are also protected single vee butt welds for Tiger II and Panther. Maus, The hull and turret of this vehicle were designed by Krupp in June 1942 and welding commenced in Ney 1943- Tais was just about the period whon interlocking joint construction was first in vogue, consequently it followed this system. The hull and turret are illustrated in Photographs Figs. 49, 50, 51 and 52. Dimensions of hull and turret are approximately as follows:- Hull Length = 2ht = 6" Width =10'- 5" th = kt = 0" Der’ o Plate thickness Front 160 mm, at 35 2 from horizontal Is g Sides = 170 mm. Vertical . e Rear = 155 um. at 50° fran horizontal Turret Length = 17! - 0" Wiath sio!-5" Depth = &t - 25" Plate thicimess Front = 200 mm, curved i. i Sides = " " at 65° from horizontal ie "Rear = = 200 mm, at 75° fran horizontal The weight of the finished vehicle was reputed to be in the order of 200 tons but it does not appear that one was ever completed. Krupp built three hulle end turrets(waa) -u- one of which was sent for firing trial, the other two remained in their Works. All the front and rear to side plate joints are the notch interlock type but in addition heave 3" diameter armour quality dowels at the ends of the notches, and are approximately as long as the plate dimension in thickness. In the turret, however, they pass through the notch projections themselves in both directions, and are twice the length of the plate thickness, continuing through into the plate behind, They axe thus ebout 18" - long. The holes for all these dowels are drilled after the welding was otherwise camleted. All the floor and roof plate joints are rebated except for the turret floor which is dovetailed into the side plates. Additional complication of the hull floor joints results from employing short notch projections of the floor plate into the sides, which further, are also dowelled in the case of the joint with the outer side plate. It would certainly appear in the case of the Maus, which would be designed to withstendvery heavy attack, that all the interlocking and dowelling was intended specifically to strengthen the structure. It was estimated that the weld dimensions were in accordance with the plate thickness Tule, see Appendix 4 paragraph 5 (Wold Sizes) . Ballistic Advantage of Interlocking Construction Because this system is such a radical change from that used by either of the Western Allies, some trouble was teken to elicit from the Germans, reasons for its adoption. Most of the firms' technical representatives assumed that it was used because of its ballistic advantages, but did not think that it at all simplified production over the previous joint forms. Dre Lucke of Krupp put forward the following reasons:- (a) It provided additional ballistic resistance by virtue of mechanical support over and above that given by the welds. (b) It providea greater strength by increasing the totel length of welding. (c) The joints were in short lengths and so prevented the spreading of cracks.-15- (@) The machining for rebated joints was eliminated. Herr Hausmarm, Chairman of the Electrode Sub- committee of the Panzer Comission, stated that the change from rebated to interlock joints had been Antroduced in order to iS allow of gas cutting instead of machining, b) ensure that the welds carried as little stress under attack, as possible. Reference has already been made in Section B (iv) of this report to the correspondence between Dr. Rohlend, Chairman of the Panzer Commission and Herr Rau of Wa Prif VI, in which the former pressed for interlock joints in order that profiling by gas cutting could be used. On the weight of evidence available it does appear that the change to interlock construction was made primarily on the grounds of increased ballistic resistance. On the other hand, the earlier change fron nomal joints to rebated joints was quite clearly made to dnorease the structural resistance of the vehicles to heavy impact attack, and this was no doubt a wise step 4n view of the Germans' then using mainly ferritic welding, 4n spite of the extra complication in mchining plate preparations. In order to obtain the official German view on this subject it is considered that steps should be taken to locate and interrogate Rau of Wa Priif VI. Hausmamn stated that towards the end of the War the trend of opinion was towards a return to rebated joints because they gave greater resistance to A.P. penetration and less opening up of joints under A.P. attack then did interlock joints. He also gave production experience against interlock construction as compared with rebated, and these are referred to in Section V (vi) of this repert. In the opinion of the author there is little real proof yet that within the bounds of battle damage interlock, or for that matter, rebated construction has any advantage over normal fillet weld or full depth penetration welding. There are very few instances in which plates have been completely dislodged under attack in the field. In thea6 In the one instance known to the author there was no doubt that the welding wes undersize. The vast majority of tank casualties have been cuased by AeP. penetration of a few rounds, and by the effects of HE. in which the structure of the vehicle has suffered little damage for which the failure of welded joints can be held responsible. The principle of mechanical suppurt to the plates by virtue of interlock, or rebated construction, depends upon the plates being in actual beering for the full erea of the mting surfaces. If this is not so, then there is no alternative but for the welds to teke the effect of impacts until the tearing surfaces do physically bear one upon the other. That means that the welds mst first yield or fail by cracking for the mechanical support to become effective. The examination of captured enemy tanks by the Welding Branch, F.V.DeD. during the War hes disclosed, on all vehicles investigated, very poor set up conditions, even in the cases of machined rebated Joints on the earlier models of Pze II, III and IV. Sections cut fran Panther and Tiger have shown quite conclusively thet the mechenical support is Just not there and camot take effect until feil~ uré of the welds and subsequent movement of the plates has occurred, fn example of the geps which may occur is given in photograph Pig, 52. Such construction can be likened to a badly built but well pointed brick well. The pointing gives an appearance of solidity, but there may be many interstices due to un- filled joints in the interior brickwork. Similarly, a finish welded interlock armour construction conveys the impression of solidity and strength which may be completely misleading. In the opinion of the author such construction can only prove of greater ballistic value over normal design if true mechanical surface bearing obtains throughout, and this, of course, entails machining to fine limits all plate edges and contacting surfaces instead of profiling by gas cutting. Assuming that this precision standard of worknenship is feasible, it must be remembered that there are still the intense reverse loads to be withstood, when @ plate rebounds and vibrates after deflection fran a strike. There are grounds for belief that these may be of a value approximating to that for the criginal reaction to the strike. If the welds are reduced in dimension by virtue of a supposed strengthening through the use of interlock construction, they will be the Jess able to withstand the secondary effects from shock impact.-W- It is clear that this matter can only be solved by a comprehensive investigation on full size targets with varying plate thicknesses and processes of edge preparation. Research on these lines has already been initiated by F.V.D.D. The production espects of interlock construction are discussed in Section G. (vi) of this report. (vii4) Attachment of Armour Camponents and Structural Parts There are a number of points on the methods of attachment of sub-components and fittings which ere of comment. A considerable measure of mech- anical interlocking between such components and the main armour, combined with welding wes used. The more outstanding of these taken from Tiger II, are described below end shown on Drawing Appendix P. (a) Final drive protection armour (See Photograph Figs29) (») This is e curved plate 60 m. thick in Tiger IT which is cornected to the lover side plate in front of the final drive. It has two interlock notch projections with packers at the ends of the notches, together with a dowel 55 mm. dia. which is machined solid with this plate. The object of the dowel is not sppreciated unless it is to form an exact loce~ tion for the upper end of the protecting plate. This does not appear fully logical as the lower end of the curved plate will take up its position accord- ing to the gas cut profile of the notch openings in the front of the side plate. The detail is similar in principle for both Tiger II and Panther. On a ballistic basis the cambination of a machined dowel with the gas cut interlock notches is not considered a sound construction for the reasons already put forwards In the opinion of the writer an equally satisfactory @esign on a ballistic basis and me considerably mare economical in produetion with no increase in weight would be a simple corner connection with the curved protection plate covering the front edge of the side plate allowing sufficient space for a fillet weld be- tween them, with another fillet weld om the inside corner. Hall KG. Housing This example is one of a mmber of cases in which the component casting is spigoted into the armour plate,(e; ce with the spigot passing through sufficiently far enough to eneble a system of circliping to be used. The circlips are in segmental form made from plate, and are welded to both the component end the armour base. ‘The external weld between the component and the armour may be a grooved butt weld or e normal fillet weld, It is unlikely with this system that complete Gislodgement: of the component would be effected under attack adjacent to it, but there would still be a Like- lihood of extensive weld cracking unless the whole were @ tight fit with accurate mechanical bearing before welding. On consideration of the thickness of the circlips it is unlikely thst they were used for a purely production purpose such as tc assist assembly. This is again an instance where mich production effort is put into a device of very doubtful advantage. Attachment of hinges Three examples of hinge attachnents are described. It is clear that the Germans found it difficult to attach hinge parts sufficiently strongly without recourse to mechanical locking in addition to welding. The first case is taken fram an early Krupp design for Tiger II turret roof door. In addition to the welding, the hinge lugs were dovetail grooved into the base plate. Another instance, again for Tiger II turret, is of a normal type leaf welded to the armour plate surface, but also dowelled with the dowel pins welded in. Finally, another example is given of the back door in Tiger IT turret - Krupp design. In this case the hinge blocks, show in photographs Figs. 7 and 6 have a substantial dowel, machined integral with the block, which passes through the base plate and is plugged and fillet welded round to the inside surface of the plate. Of the three examples described the third is the soundest in principle. The attactment of a small comp- onent such as a hinge must be sufficient to withstand the effects of anear strike. It is difficult to do this without making the component unduly heavy in order to obtain an adequate amount of weld metal. In passing the heavy dowel through the plate and fillet welding it on the inside this increase in welding is obtained with very little increase in weight. The use of light dowel pins as in case 2 is not good, as the amount of attachment given by them is limited by their small cross-sectional area and the small doubtful quality fillet weld round their ends.eg ‘The dovetail section morticed joint may or may not be sound against adjacent shock, but it is no doubt very expensive. (a) Front Bulkhead or Roof Support This menber is not in fact a bulkhead, although it is located at the front of the fighting camertment. 4s is seen from Drawing Appendix P the menber provides support to the roof plate adjacent to the front of the turret ring, and spans from the lower side plates. It is constructional quality steel St.37-21M 20 ume thick» The method of attachment to the hull side plates and pannier floor plate is of interest, and is dependent on the late stage of production in which it is fitted, After welding of the ull armour is completed the roof support plate is inserted and forced against the roof plate, with wedges against the pannier floors, Other wedges against the side plates locate the support plete laterally. Thus, the very considerable internal tol- erence in hull dimensions is cvercane. It is seen from the drawing showing floor members, that the internal hull width between lower side plates is given a * 8 mm. tol- erance, or approximately * 3/8". Section P2Q2 on drewing Appendix P details the wela- ing of the support plate to the wedges and the wedges to the hull plates. In order to obtain en intermittent weld to the roo? plate the support plate is notched with four long notches along its upper edge where welding is omitted. The main criticism against the design is that the welds are of insufficient length and section particularly against the side plates. They are equivalent to four 9/16" fillet welds 4" long on the upper side plates and only two such welds on the lower side plates. Tt is not considered that they would withstand much impact on the side plates without extensive cracking and risk of displacement of the wedges. It is considered that there would be no object in using this type of cmstruction when the internal di- mensions of the hull ere within close limits, in which case the support plate would be used as an internal profile in jigging and assembly.(e) (t) Floor Members The main longitudinal and transverse floor members are made from constructional quality steel 3t.37.2Ui and are 10 mm. thick, ‘The longitudinals are approxi- mately 215 mm. and the trensverse are 145 mms. deep. Photograph Fige 26 shows a method of intersection of these menbers which avoids a complete break in eithar of them, The transverse members are notched with an "egg box" type notch which passes over the lower part of the longitudinal members at the lightening holes, thus giving continuity of the upper part of the trans- verse menbers, thereby increasing the reliebility of the construction. Again, to allow for the wide variations in hull width, the transverse menbers are connected to the lower side plates with a lepped plate shown in Drawing Appendix P. In the case of the D.HH.V. Tiger II, the lap plates are substituted by an angle, scallop welded to the side plates, as shom in Photograph Figs 16, A difference in assembly sequence is noted here. At Krupps the lep plates were welded after the floor assembly was welded to the lull. At DeHeHeV. the scallopped angles were welded to the side plates in sub-assembly stage. With the system of wide tol- erencing used, it is considered that the Krupp method was the safer with regard to accuracy, and consequently time, even though the welding in the main assembly'was thereby increased. A straightforward end sound attachment of the torsion bar bearings to the longitudinal members was obtained by passing them through a hole and fillet welding round on both sides, without recourse to spigotting or other locating device. Scalloping or Serrating Since their early models of tanks the Germans made use of serrating end scalloping, for the attachment of angle sections to armour plate. The angles used in connecting upper to lower hull assemblies in the tans preceding Panther end Tiger II were scalloped, "Enquiries were made of both Krupp and D.H.HeVe engineers as to why it was used but they were not able to give en authoritative answer. It is fairly obvious that scalloping is used, as in this country, to give a weld providing resistance to(4x) Sol reaction force couples without welding along the upper edge of the angle. The criticism offered by the writer against the German detailing of the scallop is that the segnental forn is not as effi- cient for the purpose of the rhomboid shape, apart from its being slightly more complicated in welding. Examples of such scallops are shown on the engine compartment of the hull longitudinal section in Drawing Appendix P. The angles used are in constructional quality St.37-21M. It is considered that the weld sizes are on the small side for the thickness of the angles ana the armour plate. (g) Design - General As has been stated earlier in this section, the outstanding difference of German from Allied design is in the use of interlock and plug type construction, and whether this is sound in principle is not yet proven. It is not possible, nor indeed is it within the scope of this report to anelyse the design and’ detailing of welding throughout Geren tenk design. It is strongly reccmmended by the writer, however, that the many drawings which heve been evacuated from Germany should be given close and methodical study, particularly with regard to the design end detailing for welding of subsidiary components. Responsibility for Design Interrogation of Drs Lucke, Krupp, elicited the 4nformation that the firm developing the design of the welded joints of the hull or turret armour submitted designs and prototypes to Wa Prif VI who carried out A.B, penetration firing trials. If these were satis- factory the firm produced production drawings. Subse~ quent modifications shown desirable for production purposes were subject to approval by Wa Préf VI end all firms worked to the same details. In seme instances prototypes were made of the front part of the vehicles, as fer back as the rear of the @river's compartment for special ballistic investigations. ‘A drawing of such an assenbly for Tiger I was evacuated from DeHsH.V. This drawing is dated 23.442. It is toPS be noted that a machined preperation for the plug type interlock was considered for the Tiger I. Whether this mock-up was made on the initiative of D.H.H.V. or whether it was done on specific instructions fran Wa Prif VI is not known. ‘The results of any trial carried out were not available. C. Indication of Welds on Drawings The common practice for all drawings scrutinised was for welds and Joints to be detailed full size and specified by throat dimension. The throat dimension mumeral in mms. is located in a triangle adjacent to each weld and applies to both fillet welds and groove welds or butt welds. It was originally usual to indicate the weld external profiles by curved lines or by the seguent of a circle drawn in with a compass. This, however, caused difficulties with inspection as the inspectors often required welds to be made exactly to drawn profile. In a memorandum by Herr Thyssen, welding engineer of Ruhrstahl AcGe Guttehoffnungshiitte dated 5/11/43 (Appendix I (a)) a well reason- ed argument was put forwerd for regularizing welded joint forms and the drawing of then. ‘The points raised in this memorandum were incorporated in drawings by the firm Nos. 8110-8114, end are repro- duced as a single sheet in Appendix Q. These drawings refer to the Panther production drawings 021B.511.01 sheets 1-. and show the old profiles end joint details against those proposed by Thyssen. In addition to the indication of the welds on drawings, Thyssen covered other detail points as follows: - {3} The importance of not making welds oversize 2. Welds not to finish flush with plate surfaces and edges, but to stop slightly below in order to avoid edge cracking (3) The balancing in size of inner and outer welds of a joint. It is of interest to note thet @ special welding sequence to overcome the effects of unbalanced welds is not advocated, indicating thet the normal practice was to avoid welding procedures. he, The minimum includedengle for vee welds 5) Sealing welds not to be of too amall section Six months later, on 5th May, 194, Rubrstahl A.G. issued a drawing, No. 8124, and based on Drewing Nos. 8110-8114; approved byEaeane Wa Prif VI eae wee proposals, under cover of a letter, see Appendix I Firms were instructed to use the drawing as a supplement to the production drawings. Although, with regard to point (5) above, the plugs in plug joints were bevelled in order to increase the throat dimensions, this was not done on the hulls seen at DeEeH.V. or F. Krupp during the visits there by the writer. De Welding Electrodes (i) History A fully detailed report of German research and development of Tank Armour Welding is presented by Major Denaro, R.E. in which the types of electrodes used to the end of hostilities are described. It is proposed here to make brief mention of them and of their effect on design and production. Briefly, the general history of electrode types is as follows: ~ On the early production of light vehicles, isc. PasKweII and Ill, ferritic electrodes with a hard surfec- ing layer were used. This later changed to combinations of austenitic, ferritic and hard-surfacing electrodes. In early 1942, because of the disastrous effects of the first Russian winter on ferritic and hard surfacing welds @ complete change-over to austenitic electrodes was ordered by Wa Prif VI, after considerable pressure had been exerted by Dr. Rohland, Chief of Production Committee I (See Appendices B, C, D and &) The estimated requirements of austenitic electrodes, by Hausmann, Chairman of the Production Camittee's Sub- committee (I.K.) on Electrodes, for the first three quarters of 1944 was made in July 1945, and was:- 1st quarter 2,330 tons 2a 2,880 “ Sra * 3,350" During 1943, however, it became spparent that the supply of austenitic electrodes would not meet the demand and it was order by Wa Prif VI (Oberat Rau) on 5th January, 1944, and repeated on 5th June, 194) that welds with throat thickness up to 12 mm. with the exception of the root run, should be welded with ferritic electrodes. There were exceptions allowed to this gencral rule such as welds made under great restraint, end welds over 12 mm. throat, whichok could continue to be welded wholly with austenitic electrodes, but it wes directed that not more than 30% of the electrodes required for a hull should be austenitic. Further, it was ordered that a still greater reduction of austenitic electrode consumption would be required as soon as possible. In a letter dated 10th December, 194, to Dr. Scherer, Chairman of Comittee II, (Armour welding development), see Appendix H, Hausmam gave illuminating figures of the electrode requirements for individual vehicles. But it appears that there was not a clear understanding with regard to the per~ missible quantities of austenitic electrodes. Hausmann apparently understood the 30% to refer to the amount of austen- itic electrodes to be used in the restricted seams - not on the total welding per vehicle. It is of interest to note that quite a large allowance of electrodes was made for training of operators. (ii) Estimation of Quantities In estimating electrode quantities per vehicle Hausmann caloulated a figure fram the drawings, and to this added the following allowances: - 4) Increased depth and width of joint - 15% ii) For tackwelding and repairs or rectifications - 25% . je) For wastage of electrodes - 4v) Additional contingencies - 188 Total increase 87% Such a percentage increase over calculated quantities would sppear excessive campared with U.K. practice. This view is confirmed by the results of an actual consumption check taken ot D.H.H.V. in Jamary, 1943, on a Panther hull and turret in which the total in electrode consumption was 334. Kg. for all austenitic welding, (See Appendix F). This compares with the 415 Kg. estimted by Hausmann for the aust- etic welding only, prior to introduction of the 50% restric- tion instruction. (444) Blectrode Makes and Sizes Used ‘The electrodes finally approved for the welding of armour were:== 25- Austenitic Fox A.7 made by BBhler Vol0eA frees ‘Thermanit X “ "DEW. AcK.V.P.. Rea Polar. Low Alloy Red Black made by Agil R.N.D. B.Voh20 | " " P. Krupp At Krupps, all internal fittings were welded with austenitic electrodes until early 19. when E.V.420 electrodes were used, The size of electrodes depended to a certain extent on the technique of welding adopted. As a large propartion of the welding was carriéd out in the horizontel-vertical @omband position as well as some in the vertical position, not many large gauge electrodes were used. Accordingly, the consumption of 8 um. diameter electrodes was not very great, end that of 4, 5 and 6 mm. diemeter formed the greater pert. Examination of the Panther electrode casumption test Appendix F (before the austenitic electrode restriction) shows that the consumption of 8 mm. dia. electrodes on the hull was 11% and on the hull and turret 9% by weight. (av) Experiences in Production Shops In the period up to 194) there was little trouble fran weld cracking, accordingto statements made by Krupp and D.H.H.Ve with the 18/8 austenitic electrodes. This was not Dorne out, however, by examination of hull and turret process sheets for the 1943 period at D.HaH.V., when a very large proportion of the welding time was spent in making good de~ fective welding, Both firms stated, however, thet a the introduction of 70% ferritic electrodes in Jenuary 1944 their cracking trouble inereased extensively. F. Krupp did not reach the position of being able'to use ferritio electrodes in Mger II bull pro- éuction due to weld and junction cracking, but they were used on Tiger II turrets without much trouble in this respect. D.HeHeVe stated that their incidence of cracking was about 30- 40% wnich was reduced to 10-20% as electrodes improved and alternative procedures were developed. One such procedure was to deposit initial runs with ferritic end the final layers06 = with austenitic electrodes "because the tougher final austenitic layer gave better ballistic results". It seems very likely, however, that this may have been done to conceal cracking in the underlying ferritic deposit. Long junction cracks were seen in austenitic welds during the inspection of hulls and turrets at DeH.H.V. Both firms bad difficulty during winter weather as heating systems in the Works more or less ceased to function due to bombing. Krupp particularly suffered in this respect following extensive breaking of roof and wall glezing, and used braziers in an attempt to overcome the cold but without much success. (v) Influence of Blectrode Availability on Design There is no evidence that design détails of welded joints were ever modified to suit the types of electrodes available for welding armour. Thus, when the 70% ferr- itic welding restriction was introduced firms were not required to increase weld sections to allow for their reduced ballistic strength. In fact, the builders were specifically requested in May 1944 to ensure that welds were not made larger than the Drawing size, see Appendix I.b. There is also no indication that interlock Joint construction was influenced by electrode composition. (vi) Storage and Salvage of Blectrodes F. Krupp and D.H.H.V. stored their electrodes in a dry place, and no other especial arrangements were made to keep them Gry, except that Krupp had drying ovens in the shop. There was no control over the period between issue to and use by the operators. It was noted, when inspected, that the D.H.H.V. electrodes were stored in the very damp air raid shelter under the shop. D.H.H.V. salvaged all their electrode stub ends for return to the furnaces, and large omtainers with assorted sizes of electrodes were seen. Krupp melted dom their stub ends complete with coatings for re-manufacture. Krupp used a special quiver and holder from May - October 194 for which they made fully extruded electrodes, similar to the system developed by F.V.D.D. It was abandoned, however, due to its unpopularity with the operators. They did not try welding mild steel stub ends to austenitic electrodes, as again wes introduced by F.V.D.D.E. Siz] = Preperation of Armour Plate for Welding (4) Gas Cutting Until the introduction of interlock joint construction in the Spring of 1942 it is apparent from the correspondence in the éppendices B, C and D, that plate preperation for welded Joints was carried out by machining, At this time it was urged by Dre Rohland, Chief of the Panzer Production Comittee, that gas cutting was essential for the preparation of plates for interlock joints and should be used on the new Tiger and Panther construction, as well as for the Pz.kw.IV. With the rebated joints hitherto largely used, machining was, of course, essential, and to economise in machine tools on the Mc. IV, then in full production, Dr. Rohland forced through, against the opposition of Wa Priif VI, alteration of existing Grawings and instructions to all firms to chenge over to gas cutting on this andother vehicles. At the end of hostilities, according to Dr. Lucke of F. Krupp, the only places where armour machining was used on all vehicles, was for rebated Joints and for the connection of components such as gun mount- ing details, covers for access holes, periscopes and suspensions. A full account of the equipment used by the Germans for gas cutting of armour is given in the Report by the Gas Cutting Investigating Team of the British Tank Welding Mission, In drawing Appendix R of this report is given a sletch of the lay- out of the gas cutting machines at the Arbrecht Works of F.Krupp, for the preperation of plates for their production of Tiger II. Photograph Fig. 42, shows Tiger II upper front plates efter pro- filing, at the above works. These have still to be machined for the rebated joint to the roof plate and for the MsGe mounting seating. The tolerances laid down for gas cutting are stated in Specification T.L,21/9017, Appendix A. The following tolerances were laid down at Krupp for gas cut dimension.=o Dimensions resulting fran gas cutting (a) for’ dimensions not toleranced on drawings Dimensions 10 = 50 50 = 500 500 - 2000 Over 2000 + 300 Tolerance + 1.0 +15 + 2.0 - 15 = 200 - 005 - 1.0 (b) for closed cuts (such es plug joints) Dimension 10-50 50 - 500 Tolerance +10 + - 0.0 _ It is considered that the amount of irregularities such as fluting, permitted by this Specification is excessive. The limits to these remained at least until July 1944, when the Krupp "Directions for Work upon Armoum" were prepared. See Appendix K. That fluting up to the depth and width of 8 x 11 ums. should be allowed on edges, particularly those which have to be subsequently welded appears,to say the least, excessive. Where subsequent machining of gas cut edges for components was required, it was stated by D.H.H.V. thet the plates were subjected to an oven heat treatment of 400 - 500° for 3 - 4 hours, the time depending on the plate thickness. The finish machining in the case of D.H.H.V. was carried out by the tank erectors, Daimler Benz, an the completed hull. Advice was given at the Willich Works, Deutsche Edelstahlwerk, that plates up to 15 mm. square were gas cut squere to profile, and then the welding bevels were machined, After gas cutting the edges were softened for machining by heat treating the whole plate by placing it in an oven at 700°C for a few minutes and then slowly cooling. Plate thicknesses on the Sd.Kfz.234/3 were in the main 15 mm, thick and under. The visor and nose plates, however, were 30 um. thick. It is of interest to note, from the Works Memorandum No.97, Appendix E (b) that the use of gas cutting at Krupp on Tiger I resulted in a saving of approximately 33% on the manufacture of hulls including assembly erection and welding. (43) Plattening and Bending The flatness tolerances permitted are covered in Speci- fication T.L.21/9017 sppendix A. It was stated by D.HeH.VeS29. thet they considered these too great, and the firm accordingly laid dow a flatness tolerance of 3 mm, ageinst the specification 5m, Where the length of the plate was such, however, that it could be flexed in the jig to give the correct welding gaps, they permitted a greater limit than that govemed by the specification. Dr. Lucke, Krupp, mentioned that flattening was carried out as follows:~ Up to 15 mm. thickness = by hamer Over 15 nm. and up to 50 um. = dy 600 T press Up to 150 mm, - by 2000 T press Also, plates up to 50m. =~ by rolls The press flattening was done in the Albrecht works, and the roll flattening at the armour plate works. Bending of Tiger II turret sidg plates was completed in the 2000 T press to @ tolerance of 46 mm. on the offset dimension of centre of bend to base line. For both flattening and bending, plates over 50 mm. were heated to 300°C and under 50 um. to 150°C = 200°C. ~ The heating wes carried out using tom gas just prior to plecing the plates in the presses. Flattening was carried out efter the plates had received heat treatment end had been rough gas cut square. Bending wes completed after the plates had been finish gas cut to dimensions. (444) Cleanliness of Plates before Welding There is no reference to the cleanliness of plate surfaces, or requirement of grinding gas cut edges in Specification T.L.21/9017. + Lucke stated that as Krupp plate was rolled direct from the ingot and not cleaned by cogging, the scale was unusually heavy. It was removed by hamuer and send blasting before ges cutting and welding. Flame descaling or grinding was not used. It was stated in the Krupp directions for armour welding thet "an essential condition is clean.........-...workmanship in all parts". This may or may not be casidered to control adequate cleaning or grinding of plates before welding. : In no case on the vehicles inspected in the various shops, was there evidence that any attempt had been made to grind or remove scale fram plates adjacent to the welds.Fe Layout _of Production Lines The main production lines inspected ere dealt with in this section. They are:~ 1. DeHeHsVe Panther I.G, and Tiger II hulls Welding Shop Asphaltieranlager II 2. D.H.H.V. Panther I.¢. and Tiger II Turrets Welding Shop Asphaltieranlager I 3e ‘Fe Keupp, Tiger IT hull Albrecht Shop, Essen The D.H.H.V. production lines for both hulls and turrets were the normal stationary type, where the assembly was erected and tack welded in a fixed jig, and was then placed in e mani~ pulator, which was one of a number and stationary, for the comle- tion of the welding. It was then crene handled from the mani~ pulator to the inspection plate. The Krupp line, however, was the flow type and after assenbly and tack welding ina fixed jig the hull was placed in one of four lines of manipulators which proceeded down the shop. Certain welding operations were completed at the individual halting places until finally the hull arrived at and was placed on a fixed ins~ pection plate. These shops are illustrated in the sketches and drawings at Appendix R and the photographs. (4) DeHaHVe Eulls for Panther end Tiger TT It was planned by the firm that one side of the shop, which was approximately 500 m. x 25 me in plen, should be devoted to the assembly end welding of Panthers and the other side to Tiger Ile ‘These were separated by a control passage way about 10 feet wide. Towards the end of the war, however, the layout was dis~ rupted to a certain extent, by the addition of battle damaged hulls for repair into the manipulator lines. This caused dis- location and when inspected, there were Panther end Tiger hulls on the wrong sides of the shop both in the manipulators and in the assembly jigse The possible rates of output in this shop were 120 Panther hulls/month and 45 Tiger II bulls/month, for which were required and installea 34 and 20 manipulators respectively.ole Floor sub-assembly and hull erecting jigs were located at one end of the shop as seen in photographs Fig. 13. Welding of other sub assemblies such as roof plates, etc., was carried out on flat bedplates between the larger assemblies. All the manipulators were arranged with the power drive for rotation against the shop sides and the free ends towards the central passage ways The welding plants which were all D.C. generator sets, some single and others double operator sizes, were arranged elong the sides of the shop, together with the workers' cupboards and tool chests. Electrodes were stored in the air raid shelters under the shop floor, and at the time of the inspection were in a very damp state, (43) D.H.E.V. Turrets for Panther and Tiger II This shop which measures approximately 126 m. x 10 m. in plan was arranged with the Tiger assembly and welding at one end and the Penther at the other. There was no central passage along the shop, but the menipulators for both turrets were placed on one side. Output figures for the shop were not obtained; but Dr. Becker stated that turrets were produced for other tank builders besides those for the hulls built by the firm. This is confirmed by the assembly nunbers painted on hulls and turrets. In all there were 12 Tiger manipulators and 7 for Panther, arranged with the driven end towards the centre ef the shop. The welding plents were small D.C. generator sets, 78 in munber located along the sides of the shop. (44i)Fe Krupp, Hulls for Tiger II The principle of moving welding manipulators for such heavy structures is one which is not conmonly used. The scheme was to move a complete line of manipulators when the leading hull was removed for inspection. The manipulator and support frames were tied at their bases by long rods, seen in photogreph Fig. 39, and each frame hed two adjacent trunnion beerings, one for the rear bracket of the leading hull and one for the front bracket of the following hull. When production was in full swing there were fom lines of six moving menipulators, each pair fed by one assembly jig and three preliminary welding stands. It was stated by Dre lucke that this arrangement gave them an output of 72-120 hulls per month.Ge = 52 The welding plants were again D.C. generator sets, but it wes not possible to ascertain their dispostion when the shop wes in full production. No attempt has, been made to compare the relative mrits of the D-HeHeVe ond Krupp layouts for hull production as there are too many unknown factors influencing the comparison. It is of interest to note here, however, that whereas D.H.H.V. paid the workers on a piece rate based on operation times, Krupp obviously could not do this, at least for individuel groups, as the timing of the whole system was controlled by the rate, of progress of the whole line, Instead, the welders worked on a piece rate based on weight af weld metal deposited, according to Dr. Imeke. This latter method is not understood as it appears to the writer thet it would lead to overwolded Joints or else excessive waste of electrodes unless control against these possibilities wes very strict. Assembly, Jigging and Manipulation of Hulls and Turrets (4) General, It was possible to obtain considerable information concerning the assembly sequences and methods, and of the Jige and manipulators, used at F. Krupp end D.H.H.V. for the Tiger II and Panther I.¢. tenk hulls ond turrets. ¥. Krupp did not produce Panthers, however. Both these firms were producing up to the conclusion of hostilities although the Krupp Tiger IT production line had suffered considerably from the effects of bombing. The Pz.Kw. MkeIV line at Krupp was partly dismantled prior to the conclusion of hostilities and consequently the detailed assembly of Mk. IV hulls was not seen. ‘The interesting manipulators used for welding the lower hull of this vehicle were photographed and are referred to leter. Generally, the assembly methods and sequences of Tiger II hull at Krupp and D.HeH.V., and of Panther at D.H.H.V. were very similer and the jigs and manipulators were also similar in principle. These are described in the following pages. (43) Panther Hull at D.H.H.Vs It is proposed to describe this first, as certain documentary evidence was available in the form of instructions to the shops. Plates were supplied ready profiled and machined to the hull builéing shop Asphaltieranlage II. All, except= 35 = the floor pletes and side plates lower, were erected in the hull assembly jig or frame as individuel plates without any previous welding work on them. In the case of the floor plates, these were made into @ sub-assembly with front and rear plates butt welded to- gether, and then placed in a jig in which the longitudinal and transverse members were located and welded, Details of the jigs are clearly seen from photographs Figs. U, and 15. The floor plate was located end and crosswise with adjustable bolt stopse The longitudinal members were located with trans- verse mandrels on which were fitted plugs which engaged with the torsion bar bosses already welded to the floor members. The whole was mounted on a substantial table made up fran rolled sections ana which pivoted ebout its longitudinal axis on roller beerings, thus presenting gravity welding conditions for the longitudinal welds, ana giving access to certain welds underneath. The side plates lower were made up into a sub-assenbly with the final drive seating pad protection armour and the scalloped angles to which the transverse floor members were welded, but no Jig or manipulator for these operations were seen. The hull was then assembled in the main jig, A works instruction dated 20/4/13 covering the sequence of assembly is reproduced at dix G. That for the hull is divided into assembly of (a) the main ermour and floor in the main jig, followed by (b) the subsequent fitting of the roof plate and certain internal details. The operations under (a) can be grouped into the following:- Group I Assenbly and tackwelding of floor assembly, lower side, front and rear platese Items 1-. See Photographs Figs 16 - 21. The floor assenbly is located from the torsion bar bosses by means of mandrels passing through the holes in the side plates which latter as yet are rough ges cut but not machined, The side plates are pushed in wards ana locate approximately the front and rear plates by means of the plug type interlock joints. The side plates are positioned longitudinally with pins fixed to the above mandrel bar end brackets, see=i centre of photograph Fige 17. ‘The side plates are positioned trensversely at the lower edge, by short round distance bars placed between them and the longitudinal floor members. See photograph Fig. 16. Dre Becker of DsHeH.Ve told the witer that there was a tolerance of t g to 4 mm. on this dimension, with a t 10 mn. tolerance on internal hull width. The front and rear plates are then located exactly, using temporary wedges in the gaps in the plug joints, and jacks or bolts operating in brackets fixed to the jig bed. The transverse ties between the front and rear towing eyes ieee are formed in the lower side plates) are tightened end the assembly is ready for tackwelding. See photographs Figs. 18 - 21. Aecording to the works instruction referred to above the packs in the plug joints ere not yet fitted, but Dr. Becker stated that they were ériven hapet this stage. This is confirmd dy examination of the photogrephs. Assembly and tackwelding of upper side plates and pannier floors, etc. The works instruction, gives the assembly and tackwelding of the upper side plates as the next group of operations, i.e. Items 7 = 9, followed by the pannier floor plates and ‘ulkheads, Items 11-19 inclusive. It appears, however, fran the state of the hulls in the assembly line, that the pannier floor plates were assembled prior to the upper side plates. In this case the butt welds in the pannier floors were completed before assembly of the floors into the lulls. At F. Krupp, however, it is quite clear from the Tiger II hulls, see photographs Figs. 26 and 27 that the pen- nier floors were assembled after the upper sides were tackwelded in positions The sequence of these operations is of importance because of the denger of cracking of the butt welds in the pannier floors, ue to the individual plates being anchored to the upper and lower side plates, when theywae should be free to move, as in a sub-assembly condition. Further, in order that the root gap in the groove weld to the upper side plate should be within the limits of minimm 3 m., maximm 8 mm., due to the wide tolerance on hull width it was of necessity important that the floor plates should be marked of? individually for each hull as required in the shop instructions. Groups IV The final assembly operations of the hull and ¥ armour accarding to the above instructions, were the insertion of packs and the completion of tackwelding, although as stated above the former operation was completed before the pannier floors and upper side plates were assembled in the later stages of production, dust prior to the conclusion of hostilities. The next series of assembly operations is that under the heading of Interior Fittings. This includes the main roof plate of the hull which covers the fighting and driving compart- ments. Again, due to wide Iull widtn toler— ance this wes marked out on the actual hull, cut to width and then fitted end tack welded as @ last operation. (444) Tiger 12 Hull at D.H.H.V. and F, Krupp The assembly of Tiger IT hull at DeleH.Vs and Fs Krupp was very similar to that of Panther at the former. ‘There were slight differences of sequence as seen from the compar ative table reproduced at Appendix J. (av) Extent of Tackwelding In view of the interlocking construction of the Panther and Tiger II it is of interest to note the amount of tack- welding used prior to the handling of the hulls into the manipulators. A copy of an instruction by Dr. Becker of DeHeHV. to the shops concerning Panther, dated 14+10.42 is given in Appendix 3 (4). It was made at the very early stages of production and from discussions with Dr. Becker it appears to have remained the practice at D.H.H.V. with little subsequent modification. It states, in brief, that tackwelding shall only be used to retain plates in position whilst the asseubly is still in the main jig. When the56 = assembly has been passed then it shall be welded sufficiently to enable it to be handled safely from jig to manipulator. The tackwelding was carried out in lengths of 4" - 6" to give welds of approximately 1/2" throat dimension, and was made in eny position, i.e. downhand or vertical. There was little requirement for overhead tack welds. A further point with regard to the tackwelding, is that at D.H.H.Ve it was done by the fitters themselves, and welders were not permitted to do this work. Photographs Figse 26, 27 and 30 show tackwelds on partly assembled hulls, In many instances these were of very bad workmanship and a considerable proportion of them were cracked in the junction with the parent plate. (v) Panther and Tiger II Turrets The assembly line of turrets was seen only at D.H.HVe, although Tiger II turrets in manipulators were inspected at F. Krupp. As with the hulls, the turrets were assembled on base plates, and the side plates located by brackets with bolt adjustment. ‘The Tiger II turret at D.H.H.V. was assembled in the inverted position with the brackets outside, whereas the Panther turrets were assembled in the upright position with dnternal formers. Photographs Figs. 4 - 10 show both Tiger II end Penther turrets during assembly. Appendix @ gives the assembly sequence of Panther turrets at DeHH.V. It applies to Tiger II turrets also, end it is again noted that the roofs and floors were made'to fit each individual turret by marking off fran each. The profiling after marking out wos carried out with a guided hand-held gas cutter. In the case of Tiger II the three individuel roof plates were marked off and profiled separately, butt welded together and then welded to the shell of the turret in the manipulator. The above operation of marking out the roof plates from the turret is shown’ in Photograph Fig. 10, and the vertical tackwelding of the shell is shown in Photographs Pigse 7 end 9.=37 5 (vi) The Influence of Interlock Construction on Assembly It is not thought by the writer that interlock construction as utilised by the Germans did facilitate assembly of hulls and turrets. In this respect, the measure of the value of any joints is whether they are economical to prepare and whether they permit time saving end reduction of equipment during assenbly. There is no doubt, of course, that by preparing their plates by gas cutting they did it more economically than by machining as fer as this individual operation is concerned, But there is no Comparison with the preparation of plates for normal fillet weld construction or for full penetration joints when gas cutting is used for these. With regard to economy in assembly equipment, the Germans used just as complicated fixtures as those used by manufacturers in the U.K. when they adopted the principle of separating the digging fixture fran the manipulator. - For a bull or turret of such simple form as those for Panther I.G. and Tiger II, considersble time was spent in locat~ ing end marking out individual plates. Further, even after side, front, rear and floor plates were assembled loosely ® complicated system of external clamps jacks and wedges were used to give the final adjustments before driving han the-packers in the interlock joints. Hausmann stated in interrogation that the time spent on fitting in interlock construction greatly detracted fron the gain experienced by gas cutting instead of machining, Apparently, firms such as F. Krupp and D-HeHaV. with ample machining capacity would gladly have returned to rebated joints on the Panther and Tiger II series. In fact, D.H.H.V. had returned to rebated Joints on Panther according to Hausmann but due to their having @ large stock of prepared plates for interlock joints the change was not made in production. No sign was seen or mention of such @ change was made when the firm was visited. The firm did state, however, that they did not like interlock construction which led to complications in production, tut they assumed it wes necessary, when joining heevy plates, for protection purposes. If it could be arranged that interlock construction permitted the immediate end automatic correct location of plates without the need for continued checking, and permitted a noticeable reduction in Jdgedng equipment over that used by the Germans then it would undoubt- edly hold production advantages over the more orthodox systems. It is certain that this cannot be achieved with gas cut preparations even with that of the higher stenderd of accuracy prevailing in theU.Ke and U.S.A. (vii) Manipulation of Panther and Tiger II Hulls and Turrets Since the Germans required manipulation only about the longitudinal axis of the hull or turret of these vehicles, their manipulation problems were canparatively simple. This restricted amount of manipulation may have been due to the weight and dimensions of the Panther and Tiger II hulls, as these would have required quite lerge structures to provide universal manipulation, Also, their not using large gauge electrodes, obviated the requirement for all welds on heavy armour to be made in the downhand or gravity position. With uniaxial rotation only, the longitudinal welds can be made in the gravity position, but all circumferential welds mist be deposited in the horizontal vertical downhand position. On many of the hulls and turrets inspected there were examples of welds made in the vertical or part vertical positions, particularly at the interlock joints. This according to Dr. Becker of D.H.H.V. was uneuthorised, although it was freely done at F. Krupp and D.H.H.V. ~ See Welding Procedure for Panthers (vidi)Manipulators used for Panther and Tiger TL (a) Hulls Both Fe Krupp and D.H.HeV. used siniler types of menipulators for hulls and turrets. In the case of hulls, brackets were fixed to each end of the hull and these were provided with shafts which dropped into trunnion bearing supports. ‘The rotation was pover Griven at D.E.E.Ve and hand Griven at F. Krupp. The drive was arranged at the hull front end bracket. Photographs of these manipulators are given at Figs. 33 - |i, ond a drawing copied fran the maker's drawing of the end brackets for D.H.E.V. is given in Appendix S. The front end bracket attachment is of similar construction at both D.H.H.V. and Fe Krupp. It wos fixed through the front towing eye holes, and with Jarge diameter bolts bearing on the upper and lower front plates. ‘The rear brackets, however, were fixed differently at the two firms. The Krupp bracket was provided with two large diameter bolts and washers, at its lower side, and a hook device which passed over the top edge of the- 39 - rear plate and clamped tight with a third bolt adjacent to it. The DellelleVe rear bracket was fixed to the hull reer plate with a larger number of smaller bolts and was accordingly fined differently to stiffen the bese plate of the bracket adjacent to these bolts. The trunnion bearing support frames do not warrant special description beyond the fact that those at D.H.H.V. were fixed to the shop floor whereas those at Krupp were provided with wheels and progressed along the production line as des- cribed earlier. Tt is of interest to note that the power drive on the D.H.H.V. supports was provided through reduction gear from a 12.5 K.V-A. D.C. motore The DeHeH.V. manipulators were designed by the firm of Bellman, Hagen, Rubr, and were of sound and simple construction. (b) Durrets Photographs of the Tiger II turret in a manipulator at Krupp, and a Panther turret in a manipulator at D.H.H.V. are given in Figs. 11 and 12, The trunnion beering supports are similar to each other and to those for the hulls. D.HaH.V., however, provided a table on which both Tiger II and Panther turrets were bolted for rotation, whereas Krupp used a through mandrel which was fixed to the gun sperture casting and to the rear plate. In both cases rotation was hand driven. Krupp did not move the turret manipulation along the production line as they did the hulls. Wheel bearings were provided on the D.H.H.V. support frames but they also never arrenged for a moving production line. (c) Access to Hulls for Welding Aecess to the hulls in the Krupp line was provided by light welded tubuler framed platforms which could be pushed about by two men and which were placed adjacent to the hulls. At D.H.H.V. the only access was obtained by steps welded to the legs of ‘the manipulator and the reason advanced by Dr. Becker was that due to the closeness of the manipulators on the floor there was no room for any edditional apparatus to ease access.=o (x) Wigs and Manipulators for Pz.Kw.IV Lower Hull at F. Krupp It was possible to inspect sane of the jigs and nenipulators used by F. Krupp for the production of the lower hulls of Pz.[y.IV, as the production line had not ‘been completely dismantled. The principle used was similar to one adopted in the U.K, for certain vehicles. ‘The hull is assembled in a cradle type jig which then runs on rails into the mani- pulator for welding. (a) Jig for Assembly The Jig consists of a substantial base frame made up fron rolled structural sections, with four cantilever upright posts used to push the side é plates inwards against the front plates, bulkheads and rear plate, and to which is attached on either side a yoke to obtain ancharage to the mnipulator. Photographs of empty and loaded jigs are shomn in Figs. 43 and 4. The ties which fix the tops of the uprights are shom in the empty Jig frame on the right in Fig. 43, and the bolts which operate fran the side members of the jigs are also visible in each figure. (>) Manipulators The four manipulators in use for welding the armour of the lower hulls, provided complete rotation about the longitudinal exis canbined with tdlting to about 45° in the transverse direction. Thus the majority of the welding was completed in the gravity position. The rotation about the longitudinal axis was obtained with a rotating ringe The transverse rotation, however, in the case of two manipulators was obtained by tilting the rings and with the other two by tilting the cradles within the rings. These are shown in Photographs Figse 45 - 48 The tilting ring manipulators is mounted on trunnion pedestals. On one side of the ring structure is located the motor which drives the inneron turning ring through a chain and sprockets. This is seen in Figs. 45 and 46, On the other side of the ring structure is connected a large spur wheel again driven by a separate motor, to tilt the ring. ‘The rails on which the jig cradle is placed are mounted on a structure fixed rigidly to the rotating inner ring, see Fig. 46. The tilting cradle manipulator is shown in Figs. 47 end 48 end is rather more simple in cons- truction. The rotating ring runs on two wheels atthe base of the pit, and is guided at the centre of its height by small wheels fixed to pillars one on either side and is power driven. ‘The tilting of the cradle relative to the ring is operated by oil driven rams fixed at one end to the ring and at the other end to the cradle. In’ both types of manipulator the anchorage of the jig frame is similar. Swivelling eye bolts are fixed to the yokes on the jigs, one pair to each yoke and these engage in the slots visible on the mani- pulators, and provide means for rapid loading and un- ‘loading. The interior fittings are welded in separate manipulators rotating about the longitudinal axis only.He = 42 = Welding Techniques and Procedures (i). General Although searching enquiries were made on the question of welding procedure drawings, of executives and staff of the firms visited, ell stated quite categorically that these had been destroyed by fire at the order of the Army Authori- ties when the Rubr was surrounded. ‘There is reason to assume that this is in fact true as not one welding procedure drewing was found. A number of documents concerning production timing and their corresponding drawings were discovered on search at DHeH.V. but these were not detailed to show welding techniques. The welding engineer at F. Krupp produced from memory some details of Tiger II hull and turret procedures as given below. In general, the method of welding groove joints was based on the precoating of the sides as the weld section advanced, in order to avoid heat affected zone cracking. Precoating as carried out in the U.K. was never used in Germany as fer as could be ascertained, The Krupp system was, for any weld layer, first to deposit one run against each side of the groove and then fill the space between these with one or more runs. (ii) Krupp Procedure for Welding Tiger IT Hull The welding of the main joints of the hull was based on its ‘being done with the hull in four main positions. I. On the assembly plate, right way up. II. In the manipulator upside down. III.&@ In the manipulator 90° from standing Iv. position first left side up, then right side up, although which of these is first was immaterial. Details of the sequence of welding the individual joints in these groups is as follows:~ eee ( Floor to lower side plate inside ge Pannier floor to lower side plate inside c) Pannier floor to upper, side plate inside (one run only) “ (3 Floor to lower front and rear plates inside (e. Pennier floor to upper front and rear plates inside (£) Upper front plate to lower side plate and upper side plate outside (g) Upper to lower front plate interlock outside~ hs (h) Lower side plate to lower front ana rear plates inside Tn the cases of. joints (f) and (h) the welds were made in the standing position, and in all cases the welds were built up to full section except (c) ls Floor to lower side plate outside Ponnier floor to upper side plate outside Pannier floor to lower side plate " Rear plate to lower and upper side plates outside Lower front plate to lower side plate outside foe Welds to joints (d) and (e) were made in the standing position. IiI.(a) Pannier floor to upper side plate inside, | & (completion of weld I(o)) Iv.(b) Upper front plate and rear plate to upper side plate inside Weld (b) was made in the standing position. There was no control of the direction of welding except in the cases of the longitudinal joints, all of which were welded from the centre outwards, and of the standing joints which were welded fron bottam to top in multiple runs. It is apperent that the question of balancing the build up of the two welds of any one joint was subordinated to the fewest possible manipulations of the hulls. The only instances where an attempt was made to reduce residual stress was with the longitudinal joints as mentioned above. No information was obtained as to when the plug sealing welds were made but it would appear from inspection of the hulls evailable that these were welded when the main joints were finished. (4i4)Krupp Procedure for Welding Tiger II Turret (a) ‘he side front and end plates were set up on the base slab fixture, tack welded and the internal fillet welds made in the vertical position with 18/8 electrodes. These were deposited in two layers, the first a single run in thg root with 5 um, throat and the second of three runs made as described above. (b) Roof and floor plates tackwelded in position, but Location of tackwelds not stated. Photograph Fig. 11, however, shows tackwelds between roof and sides.hie (c) Butt joints in roof plates welded in manipulator, : root truns (30% by volume of joint) made with 18/8 electrodes, remainder made with ferritic (B.V.420). electrodes. (4) . Roof welded to sides starting from centre and working towards the ends,’ using two operators welding alternately inside and out, two runs each side, all ferritic. (e) Floor welded to sides similarly. (£) Roof to front and back plates inside, 18/8 (2) as " outside, ferritic (h). Flor". * oe - inside and outside as for roof. (4) Remaining external welds made with ferritic electrodes. The 12 nme throat fillet welds were deposited with three or four root runs of 18/8, followed by 9 = 12 runs of ferritic electrodes in small diameters to avoid the cold cracks experienced when they hed previously used lerge gauge. It is noted from photegraphs Figs. 7 and 9 that the outside welds between the sides and front end rear plates have been partly made, and in the vertical position, prior to fitting and welding the roof and floor plates. This does not agree with the sequence given above, unless these welds are considered as tack welds. Dre Lucke mentioned that for vertical welding 4 and 5 mm. diameter electrodes were used. Overhead welding was not permitted and women welders warked only on downhend welding. (iv) Welding Procedures for Panther at DeHeHeVe It was not possible to obtain any information concerning welding procedures at D.HeH.V. other than that shown on a timing sohedule in drawing form, pasted on thick cardboard and dis- covered in a shop foreman's offices e This schedule is in three sheets and breaks down the welding operations for the hull main assembly welding into eleven groups, each of which represents one position of the manipulator. The individual welds of each group are indicated by a numeral in colour, ‘Doth 4n tabular form and on the drawing. Against each numeral in the table is given the plates connected by the weld and the time scheduled. Against the corresponding numeral on the drawing is stated the mumber of runs end the diameter of the electrode to be<5 = usede The welds of each group are marked in the corresponding colour on the drawing. It has not been possible to reproduce the drawings in colour, but the weld numerals are placed in enclosures of specific shape instead of colour circles thus differentiating Detween them. ‘The drawings have been so reproduced in Appendices TM, 2 and 3. : The individual operations in each group are not thought to be in sequence, as up to es many as six welders were working at any one time. The fact that these drawings are of comparatively recent origin is pointed to, as a similar schedule in tabular form was » @iscovered in a file and dated 17.2.4. This file copy did not embody certain amendments shown on the drawings. Also the file copy did not make reference to Agil electrodes wich were the ferritic electrodes specified for 70% of the welding by Wa Prif VI in January, ‘hy and which are shown as elternatives for certain welds on the drawings. The Agil ferritic electrodes are specified on the drawings as alternatives for the welding of mild steol fittings to the armour, together with the welding of the rear plate to floors and side plates. Whether this latter was done as an experiment only is not known, but the D.H.H.V. investigations certainly proceeded as far as preparing a timing schedule for them for this particular application, It is also a pointer to the fact thet the hull builders did not imodiately, end fully, act on the Wa Pri instruc- tions with regard to electrode economy. Cther points of interest with regard to this procedure are:- (a) The joints, floor to front lower and rear plates are welded in two halves by length and at an angle of slope of approximately 45°. See operations 3 and 9 in Groups 2 and 3. . (®) ‘he internal fillet weld, upper and lower front plates is welded in two halves in the vertical position. See operation 1 in Groups 8 and 9. (c) The upper roof plete to upper front plate welding is the only instance where deliberats balancing of welds was adopted. The reason for this was not to reduce residual stress but apparently to ensure that the rear edge of the front roof. plate was lineable with the mein roof.plete and for the door assembly. The’ sequence used waseS to deposit the first layer or run in the outside groove, (operation 10 and 11 Group 1), then to make the internal fillet weld operations 12 and 13 Group 4) and finally Group 11 operations 2 and 3), to complete the outside welds with three or more layers or runs. It is assumed that operation 11 in Group 4 is the straightening - or pre- setting of the rear edge of the front roof plate to ensure that it matches up with the main roof plate and door assembly. (a) The maximm electrode size stated on the drawings is 6 mm. Glameter. The belenced welding for the front roof plate, was repeated for the main roof plate in welding it to the former and to the side platese This confirms that the object was to prevent dis- tortion, as bull roof plates, particularly of the size on Panther are very prone to out-of-flatness. This may explein also why the roof plate was riveted to the roof plate support member which is the only riveted main joint in the vehicle. Reference to the file copy of welding operation times, from which the informtion in the preceding paragraphs was obtained, shows that welding was carried out ‘on the plug joints under the heading of inner details welding. These are not referred to under the main assembly welding schedule, and the reason for it is not understoode It may be that these welds, which are of very. small section and are connected to camaratively heavy plates, suffered from cracking, if they were not welded until the main welds were completed, due to movement cf the plates under the in- fluence of the main welding. It may be noted that the welding of imner details involved another 10 positions of the lull in the manipulator, making a total 21 turns. (wv) Welding Procedures at DEW. * 5 Dr. Scherer stated thet these were invariably prepared by him based on past experience. The Works, however, always varied them. In 194 We Prif VI required all welding procedures to be epproved by them, and standardised. This, however, was never done by D.E.W. tpert from this statement there was no detailed information forthoaming from this concern. (vi) Standard Helding Procedures. The following information was obtained from Herr 0. Hausmann, Chairmen of the Sub-comnittee on Electrodes -see Table Appendix LI. eye by Major Denaro in his interrogation. “Each firm drew up and worked to its own welding procedures on the vehicles they were fabricating. in attempt was, however, made to standardize the procedure for Panther during the Spring of 191. This was.the first vehicle to be mass produced on a large scale by a wide mmter of contractors and the attempt to standardize procedures was based on the idea that one of all the procedures worked to at the time must be better then others and, therefore, should be standardized, A fixed series of investigations was undertaken to determine the best, and much of the work wes carried out for the electrode camittee by the Chemische Techniscen Reichsanstalt. Studies of the internal stresses introduced by welding through the various proceduresws car ried out, the measurements being made at the Technische Hochschule Berlin. Consultations were also held with the Arbeitsauschuss fir Soweisstechnik of the Verein Deutscher Ingenieura. The point which gave most trouble in production was the nose joint of the Panther hull, heat affected zone cracking ccourring when cold. On the whole, the measurements gave no usefyl results as only individuel joints were examined and no whole hulls. Each of the firms.were insistent that their own procedures were the very best and agreenent could not be reached until a neutral consulting engineer from Hamburg was brought in, who went round all contractors producing Panthers in order to evaluate the dis- tortion which was occurring in production. On the basis of all this’ and other work, after much difficulty a uniform welding procedure was drefted and agreed by all concerned, but before this could be put into effect the programme was changed and greatly reduced, thus rendering the whole investigation and plan abortive." This information is confirmed insofar as a standardised welding procedure was required by War Priif VI, by reference to Thyssen's memorandum, Appendix Ia. Herr Thyssen wes a member of Eausmenn's Sub-committee. That the Germans did succeed, finally in drefting and agreeing a uniform procedure is of considerable interest, as on the few occasions in which this wes attempted in the U.K. very little success was obtained except where a parent firm was able to dictate to group companies, and even then the standardisation was not of long duration. Heat Treatment of Hulls and Turrets It was not a standard practice to heat treat welded armour assenblies, either before or after welding, or for eny plate thick- nesses.J. = 48 = In 1943. Krupp post heat treated Pz.Kw.IV and Tiger I hulls in ovens at 200°C for six hours. They noticed no increase in the incidence of cracking when the practice was stopped in 19.3 due to the greater output required and to their being instructed that post heat treatment was no longer necessary. Krupp had no shop temperature control, specifically intended for welding armour, and plates were stored in the shop about U. days before welding. Their cracking troubles increased in the cola winter months. DeH.H.V. had never made a practice of heat treatment except in the case of thin hard plates up to 30 mm. thickness which they preheated to 150° = 200°C. Until early 1944, Deutsche Bdelstahlwerke used bare wire electrodes with low currents to reduce the heat affected zone, give greater resistance to penetration end lower internal stresses. They contended that they experienced no cracking provided the 5 complete hull was oven post heat treated to 200°C when 180 Ken/mm amour was used, and at 300°C whgn the tensile strength of the armour was reduced to 150 Kem/nm*, both for three hours. When these electrodes were disapproved early in 1944 a change was made by DeB.W. to a carbon chromium electrode end a low alloy type, on the advice cf other manufacturers. This led, however, to a crop of cross cracking and longitudinal weld hot cracking which they were unable to avoid by heat treatment or variatign in procedure. They tried heat treating the complete hull assenbly, tack welded together, in an oven te 100°C before welding which reduced but did not eliminate the incidence of hot cracking, Latterly, they employed braziers to keep up the shop temperature, but at no time did they make special efforts to ary electrodes or use them hot. Production Rates and Times Little information was obtained from F. Krupp under this heading but a few general notes were made based on interrogation of Drs Lucke. At D.H.H.Ve, however, a number of documents were discovered which throw sone light on this subject.(3) Fe Krupp - Production The following figures were obtained:~ (Floor area (approx) Production Number of for assembly and | per month Assembly|Menipulators| welding complete | Maximum Lower 4 32 me x 110 me 120 Eull ig Turret 3 40-60 feafee [=| aneme [mm | = Remainder of turrets produced at Gute-hoffnungshutte Sterkrade Number of last Tiger II hull on production line, 462 m Boe i turret on production line, 431 (about) The welders worked in squads of three or four with a piece vate based on weight of weld metal deposited. They worked two shifts per day of 11 effective hours each, for six days per week. On Sundays there were three shifts of eight hours each. Foreign workers were spproximately equal in mmbers to Germens, end in addition Germen civilian, prisoners were employed. (44) DeH.H.V. = Production The following general information was obtained: - Floor area (approx}Production Number of | for assembly ana |per month Assembly|Manipulators| welding comlete | Mascimm Hall 3h 300 me x 25 me. 20 7 Turrets 126 m x 10 m: |Not known wz Vehiole= 50 = The Panther turrets were produced in greater quantities than the hulls. Production numbers of the lest assemblies on the lines were:= Penther 1.G.° Hull = No. 1022 about . Turret - " 1597" Tiger IL Hull - No. 174 about re Turret - " 20h " (4i4)Panther Hulls A chart showing the output of Panther hulls for the months July - Decenber, 1943 is reproduced at Appendix M. It covers hnlls between Nos. 381 and 870, i.e. an average of 80 hulls per month, but in Noveuber and December the output reached 105 per month. The average time of production per hull is stated for each group of ten hulle. This reduced from a maximm of 735 hours in September to 430 in December. The "make up" of hours of the total production time has been pieced together fran another chart showing the overall working time teken in the asseubly and welding of the Panther hull in main jig and manipulator, and fran other documents. For hull Noe 870, these are:~ (a) Assembly -of Hull in main jig 63 hours Welding of Hull in manipulator 143 ° Asseubly of inner parts A Welding of inner parts Bi 207 oe To this figure has to be added the hours for plate profiling and the assembly and welding cf hull subassemblies, which are deduced from ovher documents to be:~= 51 (b) Rough gas cutting 20 hours Finish gas cutting 4o 0" Assembly and welding of all sub-assemblies 802" uo * Total production time = 447 hours The machining of grooves for rebated joints and other details is not included in this production time which covers work only in the welding and gas cutting shops. It is believed that the figures under (a) are "actual" times recorded for that partioular ten hulls, end on which the workers were paid. The figures under (b) are target or basic times for those particular operations from which the piece rates were determined. On reference to the total target times for the welding of the hull in the manipulator given in Drawings Appendix Tl, 2 and 3 it is seen that 143 hours is considerably in excess of the target time in the former, which is 110 hours, i.e, diff- erence of 33 hours. This difference is quite probably the time taken for repairs to the welding, after inspection. In the case of another hull the actual. and target welding times recorded are:~ (e) Actual times Target times Welding of hull in manipulator 125 hours 106 Welding of inner parts 100 hours 62, Repairs to welding 98 hours 95, 321 hours (263) Thus approximately 30% of the total welding time consists of repair welding. Reference to the electrode consumption check taken at the beginning of 1945, Appendix F shows that of a total of 309 Kg. of electrodes used on the Im1l concerned, 24 kg. or approx. 8% were required for repair welding. These percentages agree= 52 - somewhat, as quite a large proportion of the repair times were taken up by bull manipulation, etc. and by grinding and melting out defective welds. That such a large proportion of the production time taken up by repair and making good was commonplace is confirmed by the fect that there was established a target or basic time for it. Against the actual time figures under (ce) is given the corres- ponding terget times, for which the pereentage of repair to total time is 36%. It should be noted that the examples taken above were of hulls welded before the camplete introduction of low alloy or ferritic electrodes, i.e. when austenitic electrodes were used ‘throughout the armour welding. The breakdown of the times under (c) above into working hours and days and numbers of welders engaged on the hull was ‘as follows:- Welding of bull in manipulator 1st day 13.30 hrs. to 18.00 hrs. 2nd day 10.30 " " 18.00 hrs. Sra day 6.00 " "11,30 hrs. 4th day 6,00 " " Uye00 hrs. Total 25% shop hours Then five days elapsed for assembly of inner parts. Welding of inner parts lst day 11.30 hrse to 1840 hrs. = 7 hours 3 men 2nd day 6.00 " "18.00 brs. =12 * o Sra day 6.00 " “1230 brs. = 53" * Total 24s hours Repair welding lst day 11.30 hrs. to 18.00 hrs. = 6f hours 3 men 2nd dey 6.00 “ "18.00 hrs, =12 ” - 5rd dey 6.00 " "19.00hrs, =13 " s 4th day 6.00 " "12.30 hrs. = 6 " " 5th day 6,00 “ "13.30 brse = 73 * * 6th day 11.00 " "Ue00 hrse = 3 "* & Notal 485 hours53 On the 1st and 2nd days of the repeir welding the welders apparently inspected and repaired on their owne On the 3rd day was held the 1st Works inspection when 214 places (Stellen) were required to be repaired. On the 4th day was held the 2nd Works inspection when 118 places were required to be repaired. This was followed by the first inspection by the Army examiner who requirea 45 repairs. This was repeated end 1. further repairs were called for by the army examiner on the fifth day. Finally, on the sixth day 10 mare places were found for repair. It would eppeor from this that the workmanship was extremely poor, and/or the inspection very strict. No mention is made in the documents examined of the extent of the faults repaired, but in the case of another vehicle, the repairs consisted of grinding out end rewelding min joints, relocation of fittings, straightening of plates (particularly the roof plate), etc. There were also many repairs called for on inter= locking joints, the welds of which it is assumed were pertioular- ly prone to cracking. A check on the possible output with the above number of days in which the hull occupied the manipulator, viz, 13 days is, with 34 manipulators, approximately 80 mulls. This compares with the actual output of hulls in thet particular month, viz, 105 for December, 1943. It appears from the documents exemined, in which there is no reference to daily working periods after 18.00 hrs., thet there was no night shift. This is difficult to understand, and does not agree with the practice at F. Krupp on the matter. (iv) Dok. Corresponding figures to (a) above for Panther turret, extracted from a turret output chart are:= V. Panther Turrets= 5h = Welding time for sub-assemblies 30 hours Assembly of turret in jig 19 hours Welding of turret in manipulator 65 hours (v) DeHeH.V. Tiger IZ Hull No documents were evacuated giving the assembly and welding times for Tiger II, except for one sheet dealing with Hull No. 6, and dated 17/4/44. This gave the following inform ation, for the main hull welding. Total time obtained on checking 142 hours Waste time due to interruptions 18.5 hours Basic time 123.5 hours Ada 10% for lost time Slopes Target time for each unit 136 hours Tt is assumed that this time does not cover repair welding as it appears not to be greatly in excess of the similar tine for Panther. (vi) Plate Preparation In the following table the times for gas cutting the upper front, and the lower side plate are given for both Panther and Tiger at DeHeH.V- These are extracted from check timing sheets, and are dated June 1944. The sequence of cutting conformed, in the case of all armour plates, to first a preliminary cut to overall dimensions, and then a finish detail cut. In ad@ition to the profiling, there were machining opere- tions required on the above plates, in particular the rebate cuts for the step joint to floor plate and roof plate. In the case of the Tiger II lower side plate, the time for setting up and planing the step joint on the lower edge, amounted to 210 mins. This was the only machining carried out on this plate at D.HH.V. The overall target times for the. gas cutting of all armour plates for Tiger II and Panther were respectively, in June 1944, Tiger IL = Drawing Series 49501 Preliminary Cut 40% hours Finish Maps - Drawing Series 51101 Preliminary Gut 20 hors Finish RORUpper 150 ml Tiger IT 495015 Upper 80 om Penther 101-110 Side Plate Lower 40 mm Panther 51101=117 Actual [Setting up [Overall Gutting and other |Cutting leadditional |timesa Ke uabity of Worknanshiy It is proposed under this heading to deal with those aspects of fabrication affecting the quality of the finished mull and turret, fron the workmanship point of view. (1) Inspection There was an Heereswaffenamt inspection office established at each fabricating firm with examiners in each shop, but es far as could be ascertained these were responsible only for inspecting finished Imlls or turrets, and also to deol with production quality matters when asked by the firm for guidence in special cases. Both D.H.H.V. and Krupp employed a system of shop inspection which was directly concerned with production together with separate works inspection departments, to which latter was delegated an Ancreased proportion of inspection responsibility es the war pro- gressed. The maximm number of official examiners employed on the PzeKw. Mke IV and Tiger II together was 12 to 1h at Krupp. What was presumably an inspector's official notebook wes evacuated from DeHeH.V. The owner, Sergeant Major Magdefrou, maintained it very consistently, and neatly, in longhand. The first section covers the final inspection before despatch of Panther hulls and turrets, Nos. 201 ~ 340 inclusive, during the early part of 1943. It is of interest to note that there were few mentions of weld cracks but in approximately 50% of twlls end turrets attention was dram to the fact that roofs and floors respectively of each were between 5 mm. and 8 mm. out of flat, with one case of 10 mm. out of flat. The remaining section of the book covers a mmber of entries in June 1914. Each entry has reference numbers which are not recognised by the writer, but mention was made of plate thick- nesses corresponding to those for Tiger II. Every entry re~ ferred to weld cracks only, giving length of crack, plate thickness and method of repair, The majority of cracks were under 100 mm, in length, but some were up to 400 mm. long. (ii) Qualification of Operators Apparently, the qualification test for operators was to weld a cruciform tensile test specimen with 5 mm, throat thickness welds., These shoul fail with a minimm throat stress of 39 Kgn/mm on 42 Kem/m* armour. Although vertical welding was-57- used in production there was no test requirement for ite Operators were trained on a works basis and it is of interest to note that quite a considereble quantity of electrodes were allowed in estimates, for this purpose. There was probably a repid turnover of operators, particul- erly as many were displaced personnel. At DelielleVe welding instructions were printed in French, Russian, and Italian 8s well as German. Wonen-welders were employed at Krupp but only for downhand welding. (441) Gaps in Welded Joints Correspondence dealing with the fixing of permissible gaps is reproduced at Appendices 3 (a), (eS, (c) ana (a). The decision arrived at, viz, plate up to 15 mm. - 1mm gap 16 to 50 ume* - 2mm. gap over 50 mm. = 3mm. gap ‘ is quite sound, as is also the increase of from 50 to 50% in the length in which the gap may occur. It is of interest to note in this connection that Rau quoted fatigue as a reason for requiring gaps to be small, and it was understood that a vast programme of Fatigue Tee tests was carried out before these tolerances were defined. These tests showed that when gaps were tightly packed there was little loss in resistance to fatigue, but that when the packing was loose their fatigue resistance was lowered by 50; Results of these fatigue tests were, for some reason, taken 1s synonymous with resistance to enemy attack. It appears,however, that the fact that armour hulls need not be designed for resistance to fatigue had not struck either fabricators or designers. In a number of instances in tackwelded vehicles inspected there were gep widths of frou. - 5 mm. (4v) Gaps in Interlock Joints It was quite clearly laid down in specification TeL.21/9017 that the geps in interlock Joints mst be packed With one thickness of plate, and this plate, must be driven in by hanmere Again, inspection of the unfinished vehicles. in= 56 = the production lines showed that this requirement was not normally met. Further, macrographic examination of sections cut from a Panther machine at the interlock and plug joints showed thin shims placed in geps between the packers and the plates. Not evon the shims were always in oné thickness! Wacrogrephic photogrephs are reproduced at Fig. 32. These, incidentally, as did many others, prove that normally there wes little or no mechanical bearing between the component parts of interlock construction. (v) Generel Remarks The quality of welding seen on the production lines at D.HeHeV. and Krupp was not impressive. The finished hulls aia not appear too unsatisfactory from superficial inspection Dut as is always the case with welding, it is possible to produce apparently sound and good looking work when judged only by external appearances. The partly welded and tacked joints seen, were in the great majority of cases quite inferior in quality. Dr. Wasmaht, in charge of Quality Control at D.H.i.Vs stated quite blendly that 100% sound work was not necessary on tanks - output'was the mein requirement. Hence, presumably, the large number of hours allowed for repair. welding at D.H.H.' and Krupps maintaining a large squad of welders at the assembly or erection firms to deal with cracked welds discovered at that late stage in production. Acknowledgemen’ 0 Major L.F. Denaro for his assistance in arranging the investigation itinerary and personal assistance in the interrogation of the personnel of F, Krupp, Deutsche Edelstahlwerke, and Herr .Hausnanne Zo Mee E.P.S. Gardner and Capt. Del. Sidney for their ‘assistance in the investigation of the targets covered by this report. fo Capt. John F, Randall, U.Se Ordnance Department for his valuable advice and guidance prior to the investi- gation, and for the use of the translated German specification T.le21/9017 published in his Report To Mr. H.H. Peyne for his assistance in classifying ‘the works documents evacuated from D.H.H.V. and his translations of the majority of the Appendices.Restricted Page 59 Fic.t Bight Wheeled Armoured Car §D.KPZ.23u/3- Hull-front section. FIc.2 SD.KPZ.234/3. Nose interlock joint. Plate thicknesses 30 mm. RestrictedRestricted Page 60 FIc.3 D.H.H.V. TIGER I Turret. Part assembled and tack welded. FIG.4 D.H.H.V. PANTHER IG. assembly jig. RestrictedRestricted Page 61 FIG.6 D-H-H.V. TIGER IT turret assembly jig TOP. Front End. BOTTOM. Rear Ena. RestrictedRestricted Page 62 Fic.'7 F. KRUPP. TIGER II Turret. Note: Rear plate tack welding and door hinge lugs. FIG.8 F. KRUPP. TIGER II Turret. Inside view of door hiage lug attachment on rear plate. RestrictedRestricted Page 63 Fic.9 F. KRUPP. TIGER II Turret. Front plate tack welding. PICO D.H.H.V. TIGER II Turret. Front plate tack welding. Roof plate set for marking out. RestrictedRestricted Page 6h, ric.ll F, KRUPP, TIGER II Turret in Manipulator. FIG.I2 D.H.H.V. PANTHER IG. Turret in Manipulator. RestrictedRestricted Page 65 DeH.H.V. TIGER IT and PANTHER IG, Hulls. Assembly and welding shop. Asphaltieranlage II. Dimensions: 300M x 25M approx. Fic.13 RestrictedD-HeHeVe Ploor sub-assembly Jig manipulator. Restricted vic.l5 RestrictedDeH.H.V. PANTHER Ic. Assembly of lower side plates. RestrictedRestricted PIc.I8 D.HeHeV. PANTHER IG. Front plug joints defore inserting packs. FIc.19 D.H.H.V. PANTHER IG. Front plug joints after inserting packs. RestrictedRestricted Page 69 ric.20 D.HeH.V. PANTHER IG. Front end of hull in jig. D.H.H.V. TIGKR II. Front end of hull in jig. RestrictedRestricted : Page 70 Fic.22 F. KRUPP, TIGER II. Assembly of hull No.462 front end. See a PIc.23 F. KRUPP. TIGER II. Assembly of hull No.462 rear end. RestrictedRestricted Page 72 F. KRUPP, TIGER II. Hull No. 461 on assembly slab - front view. ric.25 F. KRUPP. TIGER II. Hull No. 461 on assembly slab - rear view. RestrictedRestricted Page 72 Fic.26 F. KRUPP. TIGER II. Hull No. 461 Internal view, showing clamping of pannier floor plates. FIC.27 F. KRUPP.. TIGER II. Hull No. 461. Tack welded inside. Crack at arrow. RestrictedRestricted Page 73 Fic.28 F. KRUPP, TIGER II, Hull No. 461. Rear plate plug joints before inserting packs. This hull is already tack welded. See FIG. F. KRUPP, TIGER 11. Final drive protection armour showing interlock pack before welding over it. RestrictedRestricted Page 7h Fic.30 D.H.H.V. TIGER II. Packs inserted in notch interlock with rough tack welding. Fic.8! F. KRUPP, TIGER II. Hull No. 462. Nose interlock joint before inserting packs. Note unequal gaps. RestrictedPage 75 PANTHER No. 3040 Rear plate to side plate plug joint. Transverse Section Note gaps between packs and plates, and additional unauthorised packing shims. Longitudinal Section RestrictedRestricted Page 76 FIC. 33 D.E.H.V. ‘TIGER IT. Manipulator front and power driven end, FIC. 34 D.H.H.V. TIGER II. Menipulator rear and free end. RestrictedRestricted Page 7 FIcs.35,36 Manipulator front end bracket. ¥. KRUPP, TIGER II. Manipulator rear end bracket. Fics. RestrictedRestricted Page 78 Fic.39 F. KRUPP. TIGER II, Manipulator on tracks showing connecting ‘Links. FIs.40 DeH.H.V. PANTHER IG in static manipulator. RestrictedRestricted Page 79 Fic.4| F. KRUPP., TIGER II. Manipulator and welders' platform. Welding plant shown in background. FIG.42 P. KRUPP, TIGER II. Upper front plates finish gas cut. RestrictedRestricted Page 80 FIG.43 F. KRUPP. PZ.KW.IV. Lower hull jigs. FIG.4 4 PZ.KW.IV. Lower hull in jig. RestrictedRestricted Page 61 Fic. 45 F. KRUPP PZ.KW.IT Manipulator Tilting ring type. FIG. 46 FP. KRUPP. PZ.KW.IV. Loaded tilting ring manipulator RestrictedRestricted F. KRUPP, PZ.KW.IV. Tilting cradle manipulator. FIG. 48 » j RestrictedRestricted Page 83 Fic.50 F. KRUPP. MAUS HULL Dimensions : - RestrictedRestricted Page Bh rics. 5l, 52 F. KRUPP, MAUS TURRET Dimensions :~ 17 ft. long 10 ft. 6 ins. wide 4 ft. 2 ins. high Front plate 8" Side plates 8* Roof plate 25" Floor plate 3" Dowels 18" x 3" aia. RestrictedRESTRICTED APPENDIX "A" - Translation of German Secret Tentative Specification 'for Design and Fabrication of Armor Parte Secret (German Classification) TL 21/9017 Tentative Specification for the Design and Fabrication of Armor Parts Issue Tate: 21 May 1942 Latest Revision Tate: 10 August 1942 Specifications and Standards to be dserved: = Hg 113 29: Permissible Variation of Dimensions without Specified Tolerances. German’ Army High Command Ordnance Department (I.A. Fichtner) RESTRICIEDRESTRICTED Appendix "A" TL 21/9017 Secret (German Classification) A. Surface Quality and Finishing Tolerances, 1, Surface Quality The surfaces of the armor parts which may be flame cut autogen- ously are marked with a special surface mark on the drawings Vs yn) guia, gulassige franslation--Chipless mchining (i.e. flame cutting) permissible, The smoothness of the surfaces which have been treated auvogenously is to comply with the definition of DIN 140V% for surface quality. 2. Irregularities due to Flame Outting a. Irregularities of every size on sheet edges which remin ex- posed and also those which serve to form the welding groove, should be removed only when the danger of crack formation during heat treatment exists. (See locations "a" in illus- tration). ‘They oan generally be renored by grinding. a:Plate edges according to Aga b:Plate edges according to Alb a. 4 : Blechkanten nach Abs. A2a ob: Slechkonten nach Abs.A2b Qa o o aAppendix "A* RESTRICTED b. In the case of plate edzes which are intended for welded comections (i.e. other parts in contact with then) (surface b), the irregularities do not have to be ground, provided they do not exceed the following table and do not consti- tute a danger of cracking during heat treatuent: Plate thickness mm up to 15 |up to 30 | up to 50 | over 50 Depth of irregularity mm a 3 4 8 Width of irregularity mm D 7 9 au: One irregularity for following length of cut mm | 300 If the irregularities might lead to cracks during heat treat- nent, they must be removed by grinding. If the irresulatities occur in greater number the plate edge should be machined over the damased longth, providing that the tolerances for construction permit it. Should the tol- erances for construction not permit it,-a layer of weld nee should be deposited on the damzed edge. (See section B). Irregularities on sheet edges of any length which oceur [in one area) but in larcer murbers within one lencth of 100mm have to be ground out and revaired by a layer of weld metal. 3. Dimensional Tolerances for Flare Qutting The following tolerances are to be applied to flame cut ‘inen- sions (chose tolerances are not specified) irrespective of changes due to heat treatment. « a. For length and width dimensions (exterml sizes) Dimensions, up to 50 over 50 over 500 over 2000 rm to 500 __ to 2000 Tolerances, +4 +15) #2 * mm 0,5 -1 “165 2 be For openings (internal sizes) . Dimensions, up to 50 over 50 over 500 ; mn to 00 Tolerances, mm #1 +2 3 32 EBSTRICTEDAppendix "A" RESTRICTED ae The mamfacturer has to observe these tolerances for dimensias of parts to be assembled together, in such a way, that even if the nominal dimensions have to be altered, the assembly accord ing to A} and A6 is still possible. Tolerances due to heat treatment. Gaanges of dimenaions Besides the variations permitted for flame cutting (according to section A3) and for machining (according to Heil 113 29, section Al), additional variations occur due to heat treat- ment (quenching and tempering or surface hardening) on armor parts which have been machined before heat treatments For such variations, standard tolerances can not be establish- ed at this time because local assenbly conditions for armor vary so widely. Tae manufacturers should set their on tolerances for machin- ing before heat treatment so that if possible dimensions with- out specified tolerances will not vary more than 1-1/2 times the tolerances according to HeW 113 29 section Al. This corresponds roughly to 14 to 15 ISA quality. Neither the tolerances according to paragraph A3 nor accord ing to HgN 113 29 paragraph Al apply to the finished parts. Distortion of sheets after surface hardening. After surface hardening and straightening of armor sheets, the lateral deformation (see picture, dimension "a") perpen- dicular to the longitudinal axis may amount to 5% of the sheet width. ‘the longitudinal dpformstion (see picture, di- mension "b") in the longitudinal direction, my amount to 1% of the sheet length, however not more than 5mm. Moasured in one area, the leteral and longitudinal deform ation torether,mst not be greater than the greatest per- missible single deformtion. The deformations can occur as + or = unevennesses within the permissible sizes (see picture). In sheets where all four sides are almost equal, by length,we understand the direction in which the sheet was fed into the hardening installation. (1) Beample: After surface hardening, a sheet whose length is 5360mm and width 60mm may show a permissible long itudinal deformtion of 5mm and a lateral deformtion - of 4.5mm. Measured in one area, the lateral and Jong tudinal deformations together mst not exceed 5mm. ae RESTRICTEDAppendix "A" RESTRICTED (2) Exomple: After surface hardening, a sheot-whose length is 1000mm and width 300m, may show a permissible long itudinal deformation of Imm and a lateral deformation of 1.5mm, Measured in one area, the lateral and long- tudinal deformations together mst not exceed 1. 5am. a rtortion of sheets after quenching and tempering. After heat treating and straightening of armor sheets, the lateral and longitudinal deformations measured in one area may amount to 1% of the sum of the length and width of the sheet, however not more than Sam. (2) Example: after tempering, a sheet 660mm wide and 5360m long, may show a permissible longitudinal and lateral deformation of Smme (2) Bxample: After tempering, a sheet 1500mm wide and 1600m long, may show a permissible lateral and longitudinel de- formation of 3.3um, 5. Sizes of gape When shoets with distortions accoriting to Adb and Adc are being prepered for welding, the flatness af the bearing surfaces on the welding edges mst be such, that the gaps formed are not greater than those shown in the following table: ’ Soe RESTRICTEDAppendix "A" RESTRICTED 6. 7 Be ath of gap up to Joints of sheets lm up to 15 m thick 2 om up to 50 mm thick 3 mm over 50 nm thick ‘ This gap may appear at the most over 50% of the bearing surface, and not in the form of one continuous gap, but in long waves distributed over the length of the surfaces. On the remining 50%, the sheet edyes or bearing surfaces have to lie on one an- othor with a maxima gap of 0.5m, This is considered to be a tight fit. In notched joints, ‘sheet, length means notch length. This requirenent applies only to the welding of such joints with austenitic electrodes. Assombly In structures which are ‘built from several sheets or other armor parts, only two of the sheets are necessery for the determination of width, length, or height. These two parts can show deviations within the Limits specified in paragraph A} and M4, All the other parts used for the construction, are to be fitted in such a way ‘that the conditions specified in paragraph A5 are fulfilled, For example, the front and back plate determine the width of a tenk hull, while the front floor and rear floor plates have to be fit- ted. Fits 4s a rule only fits of the 12. ISA quality, or rougher should be employed for armor plate and amor castings. Finer qualities my be employed only in very exceptional circumstances. Tolerances for distances between bolt holes and rivet holes. The distances betmeen bolt noles, rivet holes, etc. are to have tolerances corresponding to the difference between the diameter of the hole, according to DIN 69, and the diameter of the bolt shank, if asserbly with the corresponding dimensional mting part is to be guaranteed. Care is required that the tolerance is not less than the base tolerance of the 13. ISA quality and, if necessary, the next larger hole, according to DIN 69, has to be usef. The difference obtained in this way is to be halved and added as a + or ~ tolerance to the dimension of the distance, Pages RGSTRIGTEDAppendix "a" RESTRICTED Be le 2s es for Design and Fybricatio Plame cutting . When sheet edges are being flame cut at an angle less than 90°, the sharp edge has to be ground down to a flat of at least 2m to remove the roughness from the flame cutting. This edge my also be removed by a second flame cutting operation. (Direction of autogeneous cutting) Richtung des Autogenschnittes 2neiter Schnitt (Second cut) Repair of cracks. Tf any cracks appear during or after the welding of the seams, they have to be repaired. The following three ways can be used: a) Grinding b) Melting ec) Chipping ‘the removal of cracked seams by flame cutting ig not permitted, Tae method of repair should be agreed in advance between the weld- ing engineer of the firm and the Army Inspector in order to avoid the reporting of each crack before it can be repaired. In spite of this approval, inspection of the repair as part of the general process inspection is required, a Grinding. If by grinding out the whole soam, a cavity larger than 1.5 = ‘Appendix "A" "-RSSTRICTED 4 times the original seam width would resillt, the ersck should only be ground so that part of the original secm remains. This applies to longitudinal cracks in the base netal close to the edge of the weld. In the case of cracks appearing in the canter of the seam, the depth to which it is necessary to grind, is governed by the depth of the crack. be Meltings Places which are to be repaired have to be molted completely down to the plate material. A heavy coated unalloyed olec- trode of the class B 37/32 is used for this purpose. The di- ameter of the electrode is governed by the width of the seam vhich ts to be melted. The current is governed by the di- ameter of the electrode and may exceed the current used for horizontal welding by a maximum of -30% Care has to be taken that none of the armor plate (beyond the fusion line) is melted during the melting of the weld, When a wold is being melted, it should be placed in a verti- cal position, Before being revelded, the melted seams should be cleaned on the edges and in the root with scrapers and brushes, or by grinding. ce. Chipping. Cracked seams should be chipped out only in those places where it is impossible to grind or melt them, Plug Joints On plug jointa, the sides of the plugs ate not usually mchined, The only occasion on which they are machined is when, due to shifting of the plate, fitting is necessary, The width of the hole for the plug equeis: plate thickness of pluz + 5% rolling tolerance + 2mm. Any gaps occurring during the assenbly should be filled with tight fitting spacers (Figure 1), and only one spacer per gap is permitted, Febricating fims are alloved to adopt the method shown in Figure 2 should they prefer to do so. Another alternative is not to use the spacers, but to make the plug fit exactly, This my be done providing thet not more than the rolling tolerance and sheet. distortion (44) are removed by machining. ‘The avopropriate alter- ations in the drawings shall be made by the fabricator.maintain- ing the standard plug forms, ‘he Army Inspection Agency is to be notified of the method before fabrications aca RESTRICTEDa ee 1 Futterblech I1 Spacer plate)Appendix "A" RESTRICTED Se Weld Sizes The following sizes should be used as a guide for dimensioning welds in new designs: Thicknesses af. sheets Siae of Weld Accord= to be welded together ing to HeN 106 31» 8 mm with 6 om 4 4m * 14m 6 30 mm " 20 mm 8 50 mm " 30 mm 10 80mm " 40 mm 12 80m " 50 mm 4 60m * 6m 16 80m “ 80 m 16 eames apetams ten fe Rt elec eh x Yates eta These sizes are definitely only suggested as a guide and do not exclude a stronger construction if it is necessary, especially whon thicker plates are used, ‘The dimension of the exposed surface in the case cf sheets rest- dng on one another is shown in the following table: o Sheet thickesss Hxoqsed surface a b (see Dravine 2: 8 10 14,5 20 5) a RoyAL The sifes given above are minimm sizes. They can only be de- creased when a satisfactory joint will result. Design of tapped holes, If threads in armor are unavoidsble, the threaded holes should be mede in the following manner: 219= RESTRICTEDAppendix "A" RESTRICTED qa (2) (3) tfHgN 11207) 1.8 Seigung (es Fire) Gewinde ®S dia (Thread dia. +0.5) Undercut with a Strassmam Tool. Fron not dimensioned Also permissible. Will not be shown on the drawings. 20% of all threaded holes of one group of holes in one part, may be damaged beyond any use through finishing’ difficulties. In all the threaded holes of one part, 20% of the thread ed lengths, may be domaged through finishing aifficulities to such an extent, that they are no longer of any use. In all the threaded holes of one part. the thread root di- ameters may be oversize according to the following teble, ie. tho 1.7-fold tolerance for the core diameter accord to DIN 13/14, Sheet 3, is applicable. ineAppendix "A" RESTRICTED Thread Core diameter accord- Core diameter ing to DIN 14 permissible (mx. } M8 10 10 8.8 12 9.7: 10.6 14 ae 12,4 4 = 14.3 38 36.0" 20 6 17.9 _ 22. 2 152. 19,8. 24 2165 27 23 : 2465 : 30. 27,0, 3 0. 2.5 32 Se55e5 42 38.2. 45 41,0 48. 43.6 (4) Tho thread gauge ("go" side) may fit into the threaded hole with play. 4 point of the thread gauge, 7Omn over the upper edge of the sheet may show Imm pley in all directions (2mm measured in diameter), when the gauge is complotely screwed into the hole. es RESTRICTEDPresent: Report APPENDIX B On the Meeting of the Sub-Commission Panzer II Sub=Committee Tle Herren: ity and Wel Process On _6.5¢: in Berlin Dir. Dr. Scherer Oberstlt. ve Wilcke Rege-Baurat Rau Dipl.-Ing. Boljaln Dre Le Comte Dr. Schonert Hahn Walter Potumik Schwayer Dr. Becker Bischof wile Dre Majert Dipl.-Ing. Thyssen Dr. Krainer Dre Jungwirth Dre Lucke Korkhaus Dre Miller Dre Reschka Strasburger Dir. Patterman RBsler Dre Mann Hausmann Wa Chef Ing 4 EHW-Bochun Eisenwerke Witkowitz D.HeH.Ve Ruhrstahl-Hattingen Gebr. BBhler Krupp BE Poldintitte Harkort-Eickenendix "B" ‘a. ) Krautter Dir. Dorfmiler Dipl.-Ing. Kaempe Dr. Baerlecken utscha (zeitweise) Bisenwerke Oberdonau DEW-Hanover DEW-Krefeld HA. IITAppendix "B" (cont'd. ) First of all Herr Dr. Scherer earnestly emphasized that the question of welding technique coming up for discussion in today's sitting, mst be dealt with from the viewpoint that a simplifica~ tion of manufacture must be arrived at within permissible qualit- ative limits in order to succeed in increasing deliveries having regard to increased demands end increased difficulties of mem- facture. (a) Hammering of Welded Joints This additional treatment of welded-joints, in future to be described-as "hammering" had been forbidden by order of the Army Ordnance Office after sane firms had made use of it. The Pirms (1) Dortammna-Hoerder-Huttenverein 8 Ruhrstahl 3) Krupp raised the objection on the other hand that a light hammering of certain weld joints was not only justifiable but even definitely desirable in order to avoid a cracking of the surface of the joint by removing points of strain by this light mechanical force, and thereby to avoid a subsequent grinding out and repair of the cracks or a complete grinding out of whole joints and laying these joints over again. The effectiveness of hammering has shom itself be- sides in that this supplementary treatment of the joints was des- irable particularly, on ené-Jjoints of structures, which, as can well be understood, set up specially high stresses. Joints of just that kind, could by this means, be laid without special difficulty. For the rest, no sort of deterioration of welded joints had come to light that could be attributed to this supplementary mechanical treatment, which could well be advanced as a proof that a qualite— tive prejudicial ection upon thé weld joints did not result. The objection thet an inexpert use of hammering might lead to definitely bad joints cannot be maintained, because every firm will avoid this in its own interest, as indeed, it does in all operations on which there is any question. Herr Beurat Rau stated definitely that in Armour welding - as opposed to the welding regulations of the Navy, the Railways, bridge~building, etc. ~ no tests of any kind are made on any completed welded-joint except the purely visual test for freedon from cracks. It was, therefore, necessary to remove welding faults at their source, especially such as are concealed under the surface of the joint. As hammering is to be employed on difficult joints, there was here a special danger that existing faults would be covered up- Besides, it could not be taken as a proof of soundness, if hammered joints were not ruled cut, since nothing had yet deen definitely established on the subject at all, But on the contrary, the Tiger I structures and other aSAppendix "5" (cont'd. | structures of current manufacture lately turned out by D.H.H.V. had shown that hammered joints were just as much cracked as those not hammered, Having regard to the electrode as well as to the neces- sary conditions of construction, means mst rather be found of pre- venting the formation of cracks in difficult Joints, seeing that bamering is at least disputable and hitherto is certainly not used by all firms, and, as concerns the increase of deliveries represents undesirable additional labour. Tt was agreed that the order issued, and postponed for a half- year, be again rendered inoperative in order to collect the experi- ences on dispensing with hammering of those firms, who consider that they are obliged to use it, in spite of using austenite electrodes. (2) Burning out of Weld Joints By certein firms:= Brandenburger Eisenwerke Rubrstahl-Hattingen Harkort-Bicken In special cases where weld joints had to be removed on account of the occurrence of cracks end other defects in order to deposit them afresh, the old defective weld joint was alleged to have been removed by burning out. This method of removing the weld metal was = * chosen because it can be performed more quickly than by grinding out with griné-stones and becanse through lack of grind-stones no other method was possible. In the official view, serious doubts were entertained with regera to this practice because it was assumed that a qualitative deterioration of the armour material was caused thereby. on it was laid dow that burning out by means of Flame- cutters is not permissible. For same time, however, the melting out of defective joints has been done by means of a special electrode by the firms mentioned, concerning which BE today presents the results of the experiments requested by Wa Priif 6 Herr Baurat Rau is prepared +o allow this process for ell firms if the results are satisfactory for parent material and weld metal. Based on the report of BE and information from Ruhrsteh] and Herkort-Eicken a decision was made accordingly. Directions should ‘be put forward: through these firms, in terms which make it possible to use this process without restriction. Wa Prif 6 will then issue instructions to that effect to all firms. apeAppendix "B" (cont'd. ) (3) Examination of Old Penzerstructures Herr Baurat Rau states that there are several old Panzer dodies, the examination of which appears to be desired on behalf of the Office and also by ‘the firms in order to ascertein how the performance and demands upon structures that have been in service, have resulted. Only those wela joints ere here of interest which oan first be tested for defects in the condition as delivered. Numerous sections should be made through weld joints, and ultim- ately break the joints along their whole length to examine them internally. Tests by firing trial ere not contemplated. The results are first to be submitted to Wa Pruf 6 and Herrn. Dr. Scherer, after which a general conference will follow. Wa Priif 6 will shortly see to the despatch of the. structures after the following distribution was arranged 1 Armoured Reconnaissance Vehicle " ms 1 Pak III Hull Superstructure and Turret 1 Pzkw II zs Hull Superstructure ana TurretAppendix "B" (cont'd.) (4) Geps in Weld Joints Herr Beurat Rau communicated the following:~ Meny statements had been made during a period of years by Wa Prif 6, with the welding experts which purported to throw light upon the influence of different possible gap-widths be- ‘tween abutting plates and also between the first layers of the outer and inner joints. After experiments had already previously ‘been made on the subject, the inevitable conclusion wes arrived at that along this road no enlightenment was to be found. As however, the importance of this question has increased at the manent because another method of dealing with plate edges is being sponsored by the head of the Main Comission (Dr. Rchland) which produces greater inaccuracies then hitherto, some further efforts should be made to find a olarification. These greater inaccura- cies, which according to the views of Dr. Rohland are to be left without rectifications, pose the question, what gap-width is the danger limit. That is regarded by Wa Priif 6 as deciding the question whether this process, viz, gas cutting is admissible. Although it cannot yet be stated by the Panzer-firms how great the increase of deliveries will be, a solution mst be sought requiring the minimm expenditure of labour consistent with sufficiently safe construction. The requirements for which the structures must be safe appear to be : a) Resistance to attack >) Distortion forces arising from cross-country travel ce) Stresses produced by the engine In addition there are residual stresses in the structure. But on completion of building only the residual stresses from the welding can be observed, since all other stresses only operate when the vehicles are in service. But in the view of Wa Priif 6 Depart- ment, it connot be permitted that the Panzer structures should be constructed with reduced sefety-having in mind the risk that defects will take place in service and it would not be possible to remedy the defects until hundreds of vehicles have been completed. Dre Rohland, for the sake of the immediate increase of deliveries, will not wait for the proposed running trials with at least 3 armoured fighting vehicles the structures of which are given the maximm gaps. The fundamentals of Panzer construction were then made known to the firms, from which Herr Baurat Rau drew the con~ clusion that welds made with geps are inherently liable to crack. Herr Baurat Rau further brought forward several examples dn 1it- erature pn the subject tendingto the seme conclusion, which how ever, in the view of the firms were not comparable with armour welding and therefore could receive no attentions EB 5Appendix "B" (cont'd.) The observations now put forward by sane firms on satisfactory experiences with austenitic electrodes in welding armour joints with unavoidable gaps which could not be satisfactorily welded with hard electrodes, tend to show that the gaps do not have en injurious effect on the adhesion of the joint, though there is at present no kmown supporting evidence from vehicles that have been in service for a considerable time. Various firms were of the opinion that fundamentally and for purely technical reasons gaps could nob be entirely avoided by even using the utmost care in fitting the pletes together, and thet in all vehicles campleted up to now the gaps were probably more numerous and bigger than has hitherto been gen= erally assumed. The researches of BUhler may here be referred to, which showed that a closely fitting joint showed a gap efter welding, whereas & gap left as it was before welding wos no longer there after welding. The stetements of DHHV may also be cited according to which, for instance, in many cases geps simply cannot be avoided in welding the parts in turrets. The results of the examination of the used armoured vehicles will be of interest in this connection. To the objection that such developments of cracks can be avoided Af austenitic electrodes are definitely used, Herr Baurat Rau replied ‘that even these electrodes vary very mich, and in any case those in question would, generally speaking, result in a rising demend for Alloy which is not in accordence with the acute need for measures of econony. With reference to the occurrence of unavoidable gaps es hitherto observed and bearing in mind that it will be necessary in any case to reckon with gaps of a certain size after the proposed introduction of flame-cutting, the following proposal, A, was made by DHHV in anticipation of austenitic welding : "On Zif and Bi gaps of the order of 3 to hmm. and on the Tiger to the width of 4 to 5 mm. should be declered permissible. It is clearly pointed out that this proposal only sanctions an already existing state of affairs." This proposal was further extended by Béhler by proposal B, according to which "further, a gep of 2 to 265 mms is declared permissible on light vehicles. This proposal also only constitutes a confirmation of an already existing state of affairs". 4s supplementary to this it ie proposed 0 "that the gap=sizes to be recognized as permissible may not exceed a length of 1/3 of the total length". =7=Appendix “B" (cont'd. ) Heupps further proposed D “besides the proposals mentioned for gap~widths on the Tiger the filling in of gaps by packing plates shall be allowed". In this’ connection Herr Beurat Rau pointed out that the presumed possibility of bridging such gaps with austenitic electrodes as opposed to alloy-deficient electrodes, by which according to “statements of EBW and R'stehl, gaps of more then about 1 m, cause, the weld joints to crack, does not tell the whole story, since no externally applied force is set up during construction. That these proposals only senction an already existing situation is in the first place only an assumption in the opinion of Herr Baurat Rau, because in structures like Tiger the plate edges were machined after heat treatment, and irregulerities do not appear in that case. The weld joints in thin welled structures @raw together small gaps through their shrinking effect. On this point the examination of the used tanks would provide the decisions now lacking. The Krupp proposal to fill in bad gaps with packing plates, is turned down by jie Pri? 6 because no method of welding cons- tructiod is known by which such plate insertions are acceptable. The firing trial of a Tiger body carried out recently which haa @ packing plate at one Joint did, however, show no detriment that could be ascribed to this. Herr Baurat Rau thereupon declared himself fundamentally in agreement with the allowance of gaps, but only of smaller sizes, and proposed "that with the use of austenite electrodes on vehicle hulls up to and including 27 or BY at most 1 mm. gap On heavier hulls including Tiger, at most 2 mn. gap along 1/3 of the length of the joint is permitted." The acceptance by Herr Baurat Reu of these small gap sizes, however, is made conditional upon a conference to be held by him first with military quarters, as he does not consider hime self alone competent to make the decision. Besides which, it is still not clear to him what is to be gained thereby in re- spect of production, end so far the concession desired seams to him too great. The concession of smaller gep-sizes eventually to be expected by reason of this conditional proposal is repudiated by B8bler and Dortmund - Hoerder - Hilttenverein because this - = BieAppendix "B" (cont'd. ) does not make for any easing but on the contrary for an increased ‘burden as compared with the situation up to now. After repeated reference to the easement of labour to be geined thereby and the proposal to concede the assertions made above at least to those firms that already weld with austenitic electrodes, Herr Baurat Rau declared himself to be in no position to alter the present situation in any way, so that it remains as hitherto. The firms Krupp, DEV and Béhler will continue the experiments desired by Wa Prif 6 end already agreed upon in order to errive at unquestionable data as quickly as possible. : (5) Austenitic Welding With reference to the introduction of eustenitic welding, Herr Baurat Rau made it clear that e general introduction of austenitic welding could only take place after elucidation of the following questions:- : (2) The situation with regerd to raw materials mst be passed in review on the part of Wa Priif VI (2) The resistence to cold of different austenitic electrodes must be tested. Question (1) will be made clear by the Wa Priif VI immediately when the data of Sub Commission Panzer II are availeble. To Question (2) all firms who have experience with austenitic electrodes declared that these ere superior to all other materials under 211 conditions with reference to cold resistance. It was pointed out by DEW that in the experiments mentioned by Herr Beurat Rau, according to which the austenitic electrode showed a worse notch impact toughness in low temperatures than a hard electrode, were only triel and error experiments which by no means give a reliable decision. The following experiments were agreed upon to clear up the question of cold resistance: (1) Welding experiments with butt-welded samples Using austenitic or alloy-deficient soft electrodes. : Testing for toughness at different temperatures with DVMR samples with notch in the middle and in the transition - zone of the joint according to Imperial Railways specification "DIN= Norm A 123 Figs 1A and 24 weld angle 70% (Dr. Miller of Krupp to send drawings to all firms taking part). =9 =