Answering Waffenamt, Dr Albert Hertz in 1868, working for Prussia, developed the bichromate firing system. Originally, it was a bump or blister on the side of the casing, but then turned into a horn. Although excellent in not needing a separate battery, as was required with a Switch-horn, and having no problem with weed fouling of the horn,or contact deterioration, it had two main disadvantages. The first one was that explosion of a neighbouring mine could fracture the glass tube of a horn (Countermine problem), so spacing had to be greater. The lead rings around the horn help to protect against countermining to a limited extent. Also, the bichromate had to run downwards to the battery plates, so horns below the mine had to be mounted in ell-shaped supports. The rubber shock-absorber was mainly to prevent rattling of the glass tubes (Wide tolerance) in the lead horn, and possible fracture. (The Japanese must have been trying to save on rubber by using thread and apparently cork for the same purpose) Viewable inthe pictures are the threaded portions used to mount the guard tubes protecting the horns in the mine-layer, being removed just before laying. If a horn should be bent prematurely, then a small hole in the battery comparment let the bichromate run away before the mine arming switch was closed, so the mine did not have a premature, and the other horns could still work. I believe a slight advantage of a Hertz horn was that there was a short delay before current output built up, so that after a mine struck the hull in the vicinity of the bow-wave, the mine would actually explode further back, in the vicinity of the engine-room. (Albert Hertz was no relative of the more famous Heinrich Hertz, who first demonstrated wireless transmission)
Just an aside on moored mines-There was a good chance that a vessel could travel through without impact, but it was the thought that it could occur was the deterrent. Planted close together, apart from the impossible expense, would also cause contermining, with a whole minefield exploding! Paravanes were a good protection, but a small goods vessel would find the drag causing such a reduction in speed as to make their use impracticable.
Regards,
Martin .