Were Harvey and Krupp armour processes licensed identically across different navies?
Short answerNo; the names are useful broad classifications, but manufacturers produced distinct variants and later steels could differ greatly from earlier material with the same designation.
NotesA repeated armour designation does not prove that the underlying steel stayed unchanged. Harvey and Krupp are broad process families, while individual manufacturers and navies produced their own variants. A service could retain the same designation because the material still served the same function even after its composition and performance evolved. British test results showing better performance per unit of weight make clear that 1940 steel was not simply the 1910 product under an old label. Technical statistics need their institutional and metallurgical context.