Any one worked on the Epoxy nail test standard cube?

Would be a good time to pour some epoxy for the nail test standard's we had a discussion on a few month's back... I have been keeping that on the back burner... but surely want to build some test cube's to have me a personal non variable standard...Would solve lot's of problem's when you don't have 2 machine's you want to compare at the same time...


For some of the newer joiner's or some people that missed it we had a discussion a few month's back on making a standard for masking test...

The principal was to pour some clear epoxy in a say 6x6 " cube and have a nail placed in with a nickle in close but not touching proximity and then let set and you would have a test standard you could use from machine to machine for ultra exact comparison...

I think you probably get the idea of the value of a standard reference in suspended animation!!!

Just wondering if anyone has started on one?

One thing that would be great is if there was some way to make a standard and reproduce/replicate it precisely by the dozen's and be able to provide them to people anywhere to test ..

would make for a more level playing field when comparing detector's ... let's face it one person will never be able to test all detector's but with the web and youtube we have abundant tool's just a few year's ago was unheard of to bring us valuable information virtually for free...

I was thinking this evening how much research I can do right here on my laptop in the recliner that use to take me hour's and hour's at the library to come up with... And actually I can find better research material as more and more book's Diary's( My favorite) and document's and map's are digitized ....

And think of all the detector info that is now available to a new comer to the hobby that has taken detectorist year's and year's to accumulate through trial and error ....

Thank goodness also we have this forum where you can get real info!!!

I always said no one person has all the answer's in metal detector's but when you have vast amount's of accumulative knowledge from people willing to share information freely we all benefit in the end...

I know when I started getting serious into relic hunting ...I was virtually alone and had to learn as I went...you would try to get someone to help you and it was always the same get a detector and go out in the wood's and look....no one would help ....well after I grew in the hobby and figured thing's out I started to have the same attitude till one day when I helped this young boy he was about 15-16 and just a kid who approached me one day while I was hunting on the side of a road and asked about relic hunting... He was very enthusiastic .. he would tag along with me for his summer break and I liked him so I showed him what I knew and places to hunt and he found relic's and was tickled to death and that's when I finally figured out what detecting was all about ....It's about having Fun....and helping people who just want to have fun also...If you can help a kid enjoy detecting at that age it might of changed his whole life for the better..I know it changed my detecting outlook..That was 18 years ago...

Anyway guess that got off track.....And I am not saying if you are digging gold coin's or confederate relics by the load to show people where you are digging...but try to help people understand whatever bit of knowledge you might have on a subject...I honestly believe that I have found more relics and coin's and good find's than the other people who where stingy with what they knew and would not tell...




Keith







Keith

I am sure Tom D., the guru of standardization, would agree wholeheartedly. The materials used should be items commonly available anywhere, so anyone could make these cubes. No one of a kind items. Perhaps the members that are field testers for new machines past, present and future could put their heads together to set up the parameters (distances) & materials of the objects to be expoxyfied.
These cubes would cetainly eliminate alot of the BS factors and user errors in detector and coil testing.


"I honestly believe that I have found more relics and coin's and good find's than the other people who where stingy with what they knew and would not tell"...............Keith........there is no scientific proof to support that view.......but I have personally found it to be true......



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2011 10:03AM by TerraDigger.

Where WAS this old thread?

[www.dankowskidetectors.com]


it's buried down in there a few post in

Nice video Kieth!

Good talking to you the other day too! Keep up the good posts!

Bart
[www.bigboyshobbies.net]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2011 06:50PM by Stoopstroop.

Good idea.

Personally i think Montes nailtest is a standard as it is all around the web, even in UK.

And a nail ontop of a coin without touching it maybe.

And Norfolk Wulfs way of testing recovery speed on a board. See youtube, there is a bunch of them.

[www.youtube.com]

Look at the end of the Video.

Thanks Keith. That's it!

here's more info on casting and resins. Fun stuff and very interesting idea Keith and Tom, thanks for sharing.

[www.smooth-on.com]

Keith, I did this for a test piece, sort of the same but a little different, I use a 2 inch piece of wood and drill holes but not thru, put the object in the hole and epoxy, wood is cheaper than epoxy and you can hang them up after, you can make a few different pieces with different distances between the objects

As long as I am dreaming, creating a (8 sided) dodecahedron form would allow for a better replication of objects horizontal or angled in the ground. Then some real savvy tester could make recordings of what these horizontal/angled co-located objects sound like.
And each side of the cube would be numbered so replication of testing is standardized.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2011 10:47PM by TerraDigger.

If anyone is interested, you can find the pattern for Monte's "nail board" test here:

[www.ahrps.net]

Here's a video in which I tested the CZ-3D using the 5" coil:

[www.youtube.com]

to make a test plot that can be replicated...

And nice video also...

I have a couple of setup's like that....not the exact layout maybe a little tuffer in some aspect's ...but I see where Monte kept it safe for the most part....He know's to keep it from actually discouraging detector user's....make the test to difficult and it will lead to people becoming discouraged in the hobby and that is not what you want to do...But it does offer enough testing to actually get people to thinking...and that's alway's good...

Be honest though if your cz did not pass the test would you not loose alot of confidence in your equipment...I heard some target's in the video get a little raspy and chirpy so yes the demo is doing it's job for sure...

It's an excellent introduction into the world of masking without giving a whole picture of what we really have to deal with....Monte did well with his approach...

If you could actually see the iron that is in the ground (just nail wise) in say a forgotten house site deep in the wood's devoid of modern trash with all the easy target's already dug it would become discouraging quick to see how you can go in and not dig nothing non-ferrous out of there yet also know without a shadow of a doubt that there is more and better targets lurking under/between/on top/beside/etc/etc/ the nails than has ever came out to date on this site...


this is the reason for the nail& target in cube....it creates the hardest scenario that a few current detector's can pass and I say few...but if the target in the cube can be heard you know you are giving the site's your best effort for now....Because there is a dozen other thing's on the in ground target that is worse than the hardest test you can concoct in the air...


It really help's when a person get's into extreme target retrieval to have a good understanding of what is actually in the dirt under your feet even mineral wise...

I myself like to sort of paint a mental picture as I hunt the site knowing that there is 1000's of nails and bit's of nails and flakes of decomposed iron and countless other pieces and sizes of iron laying there in a jambalaya mix.....

it also helps to have a detector report even the target's you are discing out like the nail's.....This is one reason the newer G-2 is excellent at un-masking because you set the tone break and also hear the target you don't wont I.E. the nail but let's you know just how much of the rejected target is under the coil at any one time...

MXT has offered this option for a decade now also... Very good machine in dense iron....


O.K getting off track ....Glad you did the test!!! Thank's for sharing the video...you may not know it but it answered a question I had about a CZ...So I found it very beneficial and keeps me from having to get hold of one for a specific question I had in mind....Gotta love the info we garner from each other...


Thank's

Keith



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/15/2011 07:44AM by Keith Southern.

And how about the difference between how a concentric coil vs DD responds to nail/coin tests?

You'll find a LOT of answers in THIS type of test!

Upside down light bulb bodies work well for this. Knock off the threaded base.

Once your resin/ploymer/whatever is cured, you can simply remove the glass housing, (be careful to fill only a third of the bulb) you have a concave side and a nice flat surface on the other.