The t designation is used whenever you can detect the presence of illuviated or authigenic clay films, coatings, or bridging of sand grains. I believe it is used primarily for layered clays such as phyllosilicates rather than for oxides. My best advice would be to add a t to horizons where you see the clay accumulation evidence, and a w for those where you do not. The papules might also be called patchy clay films in the US. There is no need to add w to a transitional horizon.
If this is a field description, I would horizonate the profiles based on what you saw in the field. If this is for a detailed research project, I would use the thin sections to detect clay accumulation. In either case, I would then see if the pedons qualified for argillic or not based on meeting all of the criteria in Soil Taxonomy (or the argic horizon in WRB). The requirements for an argillic horizon are more strict than just seeing clay films. Therefore you can have horizons with t that do not qualify as argillic, but would likely be cambic horizons instead.
Without seeing a full description of these soils, I would consider using A, Bw1, Bw2, Bw3, CB in the first pedon and A, BA (or BAt), Bt1, Bt2, C in the second pedon.
