Etrac ground balance

I see the discussion down below talking about the different aspects of the FBS signals. The ground balance genius on the etrac may be more key to this detectors outstanding performance. All the other detectors I own require a clean place to ground balance according the manufacturers. It seems the etrac doesn't. I have hunted the junkiest of places with great results. The only thing I notice is when I'm digging a target with detector lying down, I finish, stand up, pick etrac up and the instant the coil gets close to the ground I get what sounds like a quick false and then she runs smooth. I'm assuming the quick false is the etrac ground balancing. And how does the etrac get/acquire/maintain a good ground balance when hunting in an iron laden site???

Good observation. Let's see how THIS thread unfolds.

I don't have anything to add as to the "how," but I agree with the observation that when you first stand back up from a dig (or, first lower the coil to the ground after a "noise cancel," ) my Explorer will "chatter" for a second or so, progressively quieting down over that second or so until it becomes silent/stable.

My understanding is that the machine is "sensing" the ground, and "adjusting" for it automatically -- but the "how" is still beyond me. I think it may have to do with some folks (including NASA-Tom's) allusion to this machine acting a bit like a "PI" unit...but I may be off base here.

Steve



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2012 12:34PM by steveg.

((( Yes.....on this forum...... in past years..... I have touched on this exact subject ))).

I read your post a few hours ago and agreed with it then! Upon further review... I still do. And I know and have stored somewhere that Tom has indeed spoken of this. He went so far as to say, I believe, that it treats iron mineralization by basically removing it - perhaps that is why the E-Trac is doing so well in my soil?

The ground balance, or rather ground removal, seems to be quite special on the E-Trac.

I can't offer a technical reason why this is so, but do know that from testing my V3i, if the GB was off just a little (sometimes), the unit would go nuts where there is lots of iron. Now, many detectors are picky with GB and if it's off, you can lose a lot of depth.

So, since the E-Tracs GB is always spot on, one of the biggest problems, or potential problems anyway, is removed. Optimal depth is reached easier.

No...... the Minelab's do not "remove" iron; rather, lateritic/red clay/iron oxides are somewhat 'cancelled' by the quasi-PI complex waveform architect. However, depth can/will be inhibited.

I was going by memory, sorry there Tom. Here is the post you made. I had saved it as it is quite informative and applies here:

In general....... most units will 'down-average' a coin/nail co-locate....... but usually into the iron ID range only. The T2/F-series units will "live-fire" snap-shot pretty much what ever the nominal 'composite' average that exists under the coil...... at any given split-second (yet are not immune to up-averaging/down-averaging). Some other units will 'up-average' into the coin ID range. BUT...... to a very minute' amount (esp on the FBS platforms). Hardly useful. Where the FBS platform attributes...........is............. they operate at a very low frequency(s). Even though the manual advertises 1.5Khz - 100Khz.......................... fact of the matter is................. it is the bottom end of its available spectrum unto which the FBS platform primarily operates. The benefits are 2-fold. Lower freq's are much more resonant to high-conductor silver........... AND ............ much less resonant to iron............. especially tiny flecks/flakes of rust. In fact......... tiny/minute flecks of rust to the (psudo/quasi PI platform) FBS units (electronic/electromagnetic decay-rate) are simply viewed upon as 'minerals'. The only way to analyze (electronically measure) "decay-rate"...... is to have a slow sampling clock speed. If only to have the attributes of FBS.......... yet...... have a much faster microprocessor clock-speed. – Tom Dankowski

Thanks,
Albert