Princess chipped.........Now what? Help.

[seriousshopper]

Purchased a 1.01 ct princess cut ~2yrs ago and now it is chipped. I took it to a gemologist to get a damage appraisal and she said the stone will most likely have very little salvage value. I do have insurance on the ring. The chip is not small and is on the table of the stone. The gemologist commented that the stone was set properly and that it was set well. According to the gemologist the chip started in the table and migrated to one of the corners. Does this sound like an accurate interpretation? Aren''t the stresses of the stone concentrated at the corners? One would think that the failure would migrate from the corner to the table?

Now we need to decide what type of stone to replace the princess with. Another princess, square radiant or square cushion. I am most concerned with durability and have a few questions.

1. Do the sharp corners of the princess cuts concentrate more stress at a single point (corners) on the diamond? Is this what leads to the frequent failure of princess cuts?

2. Are radiant cuts or cushion cuts more durable than princess cuts? Assuming the princess cut is set properly.

3. Do princess cuts actually chip more than other ''squarish'' cuts or do we just hear about it more because there are more princess cuts sold compared to the other ''squarish'' cuts?

4. If a square stone fails along it''s cleavage plane (as apparently my wife''s stone has) what difference will it make whether the corners are cut or chamfered?



Thank you in advance for your advice. This really is a great website.

Regards,

John

 

[Lorelei]

I have read that the sharp corners of Princess can make these stones more prone to chipping, I am not sure if chamfering would prevent a cleavage plane stressing and breaking.

So sorry to hear this...

 

[diagem]

Date: 8/15/2009 1:36:59 AM
Author:seriousshopper
Purchased a 1.01 ct princess cut ~2yrs ago and now it is chipped. I took it to a gemologist to get a damage appraisal and she said the stone will most likely have very little salvage value. I do have insurance on the ring. The chip is not small and is on the table of the stone. The gemologist commented that the stone was set properly and that it was set well. According to the gemologist the chip started in the table and migrated to one of the corners. Does this sound like an accurate interpretation? Aren''t the stresses of the stone concentrated at the corners? One would think that the failure would migrate from the corner to the table?

Chipped or a feather is split (moved)? A chip is a portion of the Diamond falling out..., usually will happen on the girdle edge or corners of a Diamond..., a feather moving or splitting open will be more of an internal issue.
Chipping a table of a Diamond is no easy task.
Based on what did your gemologist state that the chip started on the table and migrated to the corners?? Odd?


Now we need to decide what type of stone to replace the princess with. Another princess, square radiant or square cushion. I am most concerned with durability and have a few questions.

1. Do the sharp corners of the princess cuts concentrate more stress at a single point (corners) on the diamond? Is this what leads to the frequent failure of princess cuts?

The sharp corners of the princess cut is its most weak point..., other shapes that dont have those have a clear advantage on durability issues.

2. Are radiant cuts or cushion cuts more durable than princess cuts? Assuming the princess cut is set properly.

3. Do princess cuts actually chip more than other ''squarish'' cuts or do we just hear about it more because there are more princess cuts sold compared to the other ''squarish'' cuts?

4. If a square stone fails along it''s cleavage plane (as apparently my wife''s stone has) what difference will it make whether the corners are cut or chamfered?



Thank you in advance for your advice. This really is a great website.

Regards,

John

Chamfered corners would minimize the setting risks when prong-ing Princess cuts at their sharp corners.

 

[John P]

Date: 8/15/2009 9:47:53 AM
Author: DiaGem

Chipping a table of a Diamond is no easy task.
Based on what did your gemologist state that the chip started on the table and migrated to the corners?? Odd?

Agreed.

 

[seriousshopper]

John, I was hoping you would reply to this thread. I have read several threads on PS and respect your opinion. Are you insinuating that the failure started in the table and migrated to the table? I am only asking to increase my knowledge of diamonds.

I am interested in your thoughts regarding my other questions. I am simply on a fact finding mission. The results will help me make a better decision on the next step in this process, which is purchasing a replacement diamond. I understand you may or may not be able to answer my other inquires for whatever reason, but would definitely appreciate your opinion.

If a princess is set properly with V prongs (which my first diamond was), is it any more likely to fail (particularly a cleavage plane failure) compared to other "modified" squares (i.e. cushions, radiants, modified princess, etc.)?

I am just trying to determine if this table/cleavage plane failure was a fluke or a failure characteristic of princess cuts.

Regards,

John

 

[strmrdr]

table to corner or corner to table would not general be classified as cleavage plane breakage.

I am rather confused also, does the crack run left to right or up and down?

 

[strmrdr]

Does the crack run like this?

 

[strmrdr]

or this?

 

[strmrdr]

This is the most common breakage I have seen pictures of..
Red being the most common.

 

[Lorelei]

Neat graphics stormy!

 

[seriousshopper]

Yes, this is exactly what happened.

 

[seriousshopper]

Sorry, the second graphic you submitted is exactly what happened. The top view with the red line going to/from table to corner. Thanks for submitting those graphics. I was also hoping you would respond to this thread also.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 8/16/2009 12:57:13 PM
Author: seriousshopper
Sorry, the second graphic you submitted is exactly what happened. The top view with the red line going to/from table to corner. Thanks for submitting those graphics. I was also hoping you would respond to this thread also.

strange, just goes to show that anything can happen.
What was the clarity grade?

 

[strmrdr]

To answer another part of your post, chamfered ends help prevent the breakage in green and somewhat less the breakage in red except for the very end of the point breaking.
The biggest time it helps is when the diamond is being set or if a prong takes a hit by spreading the force over a larger area and somewhat away from the cleavage planes..

 

[seriousshopper]

Here is the GIA cert. If you can not read it, the clarity grade is VS2. There are no major feathers or inclusions on the report.

 

[Moh 10]

Date: 8/16/2009 1:49:46 PM
Author: seriousshopper
Here is the GIA cert. If you can not read it, the clarity grade is VS2. There are no major feathers or inclusions on the report.

On my monitor I can see no inclusions on that scan of the report.
Being a VS2 there must be some.

Where and what are the inclusions?
Your scan of the report cropped out anything below the plot.
Is there a list of inclusions?
What are they? and in what order?

 

[John P]

Date: 8/16/2009 1:26:57 AM
Author: seriousshopper


John, I was hoping you would reply to this thread. I have read several threads on PS and respect your opinion. Are you insinuating that the failure started in the table and migrated to the table? I am only asking to increase my knowledge of diamonds.

I am interested in your thoughts regarding my other questions. I am simply on a fact finding mission. The results will help me make a better decision on the next step in this process, which is purchasing a replacement diamond. I understand you may or may not be able to answer my other inquires for whatever reason, but would definitely appreciate your opinion.

If a princess is set properly with V prongs (which my first diamond was), is it any more likely to fail (particularly a cleavage plane failure) compared to other 'modified' squares (i.e. cushions, radiants, modified princess, etc.)?

I am just trying to determine if this table/cleavage plane failure was a fluke or a failure characteristic of princess cuts.

Regards,

John

Thanks SS. I would also like to see the cropped area on the grading report, as Moh asked.

What a strange situation. Table-chipping, especially in a situation where it continues to fracture outward, is very uncommon. It might have to do with pressure present as a result of setting, but without knowing more that's just my speculation.

In answer to your question in red, the skill of the setter is of utmost importance. Princess corners are vulnerable, period. They are especially vulnerable with inconsistent cutting - and some princess cuts have different chevroning in different quadrants which can make for a an even more difficult setting process.

I'm a fan of cutters who chamfer their princess cuts but it is unlikely that chamfering would have helped in this situation, unless it relieved pressure (not likely). Pressure typically comes from the below...

Setting Problems

If the diamond is not seated correctly, or if prong seats have not been cut level, there will always be potential for problems: The setter puts pressure on one corner then moves to the next corner and puts pressure there and so on.

Problems occur (a) if the seats are not level in the prongs of the ring or (b) if the stone itself is not set level in those seats.

In either of these cases, force will release pressure along a natural cleavage plane. This can happen whether the girdle is thick or thin, whether a feather is present or whether the diamond was chamfered. This is why, in your situation, I wonder whether pressure in the diamond contributed to something started by a knock on the table.

Cutting the seats in the setting correctly in order to protect the diamond is critical for this shape.

 

[seriousshopper]

Hopefully you will be able to read this.

 

[strmrdr]

wouldn''t happen to have a close up picture of the chip would you?
No biggie if not. I am just curious.

 

[seriousshopper]

I believe the gemologist who did the damage appraisal took a close up of it. I will try to get it.