TO: Dave Johnson, John Gardiner, Jorg, Carl

I'm entering my 43'rd year of detecting (archaeological/historical site recovery). This is to say: 43 years of definitive/finite scientific analysis of physics, geophysics, electronics...... human behavior/patterns/analysis/habits/traits/signature(s).....etc......
Sparing the volumes of documented details, I pose a quantifiable/justifiable (read = marketing opportunity) unsuspecting high-demand basic platform:

Keep it basic. Keep it simple. No bells & whistles. ........... with the bottom-line being: DEEP. That is it's primary (only) function. Deep. K.I.S.S. details:

No multi-tones
No multi-processes
No interchangable coils
No 'notch' circuitry
No 'salt' mode
No 'programming'
No 'Conf' bargraph
No 'auto' ground balance
Not good in iron infested sites
Not good with adjacent target separation abilities
Not wireless


The only features it needs to have are basic:

* Needs to have 2 tones:
Low tone (about 200Hz) = ferrous/iron.
High tone (about 850Hz) = non-ferrous.
The iron range does not need to be a hair-splitting fine-tune span-range....... yet should be user tone-break adjustable.
The only ID capabilities should be performed through these 2 tones......... and a VDI (1-99 is fine).

* Needs to be equiv/similar to ~ XP GMP/Deus Ground Balance/mineralization ~ concept/functionality/handling capabilities. This will allow medium-high, medium, low, no mineralization handling abilities..... with reasonable ID accuracy..... at depth.

* The coil does not necessarily need to be of DD design intent; yet, should be approx 11" - 12" in diameter (or 12" x 8" approx elliptical size).
Tune/design the detector to an exacting frequency at Max-Q for its one (and only) coil.

* The operating frequency needs to be resonant to 1870's Indian Head penny. (The low end of zinc penny conductive range).

* VLF IB platform....... unless above spec's can be achieved/accomplished otherwise.


Currently, a CZ with 10.5" coil will ascertain a clad dime in Florida (low mineral) dirt to 12.5" consistently/reliably. The (above requested) unit, with a bit larger coil and all K.I.S.S. engineering design focus intent...... would be to ascertain a clad dime to real-world depths of 14.0". A 1989/1990 CZ platform is so close to already performing this. It may sound 'logical' to simply incorporate this intent into an already existing platform.... and as a 'boost process' format; yet, attempting to utilize a 'general purpose' platform for a 'specific purpose'....... can 'self-defeat' Max-Q/resonance/single-intent said design.

Purpose of this unit: Open field(s) whereby targets are sparse; yet, deep.

All engineering design focus/intent is only on 'simple depth'. Let's 'open up' this Earth.


Tom

I hope the rest of us can contribute, without departing much from Tom's request.
Re: "The operating frequency needs to be resonant to 1870's Indian Head penny. (The low end of zinc penny conductive range)." - this equates to 5KHz almost exactly.
I think it's possible to have interchangeable coils and still achieve 'high gain', without resorting to matching coil-to-detector (Blisstool, Nautilus). Coils can be nulled better than they currently are, and techniques such as the F75's 'Boost' mode show that (with some caveats) achieving significant gains with regular coils is possible.
I personally like the idea of a dual-frequency machine (probably CZ-like) combined with GMP-like audio reporting. Dual-freq because it's a logical, and proven, way of tackling the ground-signal problem, to obtain more depth. And GMP-audio because of it's informative nature, once learned. An XP GMAXX2 (4.6KHz version of the GMP), with dual-frequency is the sort of machine I'm thinking of, packaged like a T2 / G2.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2014 06:36PM by Pimento.

That will be one heck of a civil war bullet machine. .58" Minnie's fall into that conductive range.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sparing the volumes of documented details, I pose
> a quantifiable/justifiable (read = marketing
> opportunity) unsuspecting high-demand basic
> platform:

Tom, what detector in current production comes the closest to your definition?

cant imagine something beating the blisstool beast in this department.

I was going to say blisstool.

Wow, I sense, a load of frustration, Tom, are you considering such an endeavor,that is if you
can't get the powers-that-be to seriously consider it ?

Carl...... a Minelab Explorer/E-Trac/CTX series, a proper CZ (with 10.5" coil), the single freq F75LTD/SE. My gut/feel, giving just one example, is that the 25-year old CZ platform has the greatest potential to be advanced via better matched components including a more 'resonant/dialed-in' coil........... then replicated enmass...... due to today's technologically advanced capabilities. In other words....... create a 'custom hand-built' dialed-in unit.......... then modeled for mass production. I have had quite a few 1/4-Century old (crude.... by today's standards) CZ's come across my bench..... that will far outperform many other detector platforms (new or old)...... regardless of brand. These CZ's are quiet/stable/no-EMI. Virtually no adjustments to achieve maximum performance..... simply turn on and go.
Conceptually...... I'm fairly certain there are many different ways to approach such quest.

I suppose part of my startle emanates from: I'm stunned that I have Satty's that can read the date on a quarter from geosync 17,500 mile orbit...... but have detection technology that can only see a few inches. Four million years ago....... Florida was under water...... part of the ocean. (((You can find saltwater fossils in the middle of the State of Florida))). Today .... we have technology that can see/detect to a nominal median depth stata of.... approx 100 years. Yes, the 'demand' for detection equipment pales .... as compared to the world-wide need/demand of Satty's. No.... we don't need equipment reaching depths to see/detect 4M years ago; yet, a few hundred years...... would be unsuspectingly euphoric.

As emotionally fragile as this subject "can" be........ my intent is NOT to frustrate...... or step on proverbial toes; yet/rather....... to encourage reasonable technological advancements.

Hear..hear! Well said Tom! Hope something positive can come from this.

Charles

Could this be a really awesome Kickstarter project??????????????

Past(or)Tom
Using a Legend, a Deus 2, an Equinox 800, a Tarsacci MDT 8000, & a few others...
with my beloved, fading Corgi, Sadie

Id be happy FOR NOW with the ability to break the Tone on a T2/f75 with the disc setting when in 2 tone mode.....

Keith

I believe that the one area detectors have greatly improved is unmasking targets. But manufacturers hit the wall with depth advancement.

GPX 5000!?

Just kidding Tom ;-)

It just seems to me that someone somewhere somehow could design/build/incorporate PI technology and VLF into one unit whereby somehow they made the PI end of it punch/carry the VLF frequency/wave to the depths that the PI wave reaches and yet sends the signal back to read in the VLF disc mode to determine if it's iron of not! ---- 2 tones would be fine and no bells/whistles - just raw power!

Is there noone on the planet that can figure out a way to design/build this type of unit!?

If I were a mechanical/electrical engineer - I'd sure as hell try!

Okay, done babbling now - carry on :-)

One challenging/frustrating factor is: Trying to explain/convince/qualify/quantify the 'unknown'. (Yes, you don't know... what you don't know........ syndrome). It may (initially) 'appear' that this 'type' of a market is small. If only 2 or 3 folks could have a ....... 14" on a clad dime capable unit.... for just a few days. Then 'report' the findings/discoveries......... the world would change.
Just one example: By knowing construction companies, I've had the ability to use Heavy Equipment to scrape off the top 11" of topsoil (several times/several different areas.... and over several decades) ..... at construction sites. As far as detecting goes........... after the removal of almost a foot of topsoil......... a whole different unsuspecting world (of an era long passed by) suddenly came to light. ((( How do you know what you are missing........ if you don't know it even exists ))).
Working in a archaeological capacity (of whom digs to required/desired deep depths) is another example.
"Pit digging" is also eye-opening.
Many more examples....... to quantify the cause.

Yes.......... we are FINALLY making headway with the ability to have "some" iron see-thru (approx 4%) capabilities. And............ with only 4%.......... this minute' amount is certainly enough to be 'eye-opening'.
Yes.......... we are also making headway with mineralization handling/see-thru capabilities...... like the French XP series.

I only wish to promote advancement of humankind.

I would like to see a company update the old 100 kHz TR ability to literally see through a nail. Make nails invisible, instead of seeing between them. Depth is not everything.

Well lets see what the french do..Tom you should post that on Deus forum they have a forum where the designers read what we have to say...

LowBoy

TAKE A LITTLE TIME KICKBACK AND WATCH SOME OF MY DETECTING VIDEO'S BELOW ON YouTube

[www.youtube.com]

If you don’t dig it, then how are you going to know what you’re missing!
How can you have your pudding if you don’t eat your meat!

Certainly a truism and have had the pleasure of using early CZ's and hunted a baseball field old campground area where 10 to 12 inches were shaved off and dug 8 inch silver coins so indeed more depth would
certainly open up those worked out beat parks and such.
My thoughts are those that have dug a 12 inch silver dime one wonders with the exception of a shovel how the heck are we going to dig for them as shovels are certainly not practical in most areas...

Opening up more depth on coins would also (I would think) open up more opportunities for dealing with iron masking. If the coin strata for 150 years ago is (as an example) 14 inches in a given area, then there would also be rusty iron down there with 'em. Extra inches would also increase the odds of something (ferrous or non-ferrous) being in the detection "cone" too. I'm not being a naysayer! I'm just speculating that extra depth in soil that's had humans tromping around on it for hundreds of years...and in areas where they would be likely to drop a coin or two, "unmasking" type ability would still be pretty critical. Maybe that's where the flexible break-point comes in handy, so that ferrous/non-ferrous averaging can be managed depending on the site and how much contamination is obvious.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Carl...... a Minelab Explorer/E-Trac/CTX series, a proper CZ (with 10.5" coil), the single freq
> F75LTD/SE. My gut/feel, giving just one example, is that the 25-year old CZ platform has the
> greatest potential to be advanced via better matched components including a more
> 'resonant/dialed-in' coil...........

It's interesting that your first examples -- Minelab FBS detectors -- are all loaded up with the very stuff you didn't want. I'm curious as to what they have that makes them close to your desired product.

The company I thought of first that comes closest to what you want is Tesoro; take a Tejon and gut a few knobs. A better example is the Nexus, it has a resonant RX coil. It's the only detector I know of that can hit my 24" deep cache (the T2 was second). Neither company is burning up the market with simple depth.

Also, wideband detectors (FBS, CZ, pulse) can't have resonant coils, and so there is no dialing in the coil design. Typical production skew on coils is at most a few percent, which results in not even 1/8" difference in depth. Elsewhere, modern SMT circuitry uses 1% components, and critical components are hand-matched.

> I suppose part of my startle emanates from: I'm stunned that I have Satty's that can read the date
> on a quarter from geosync 17,500 mile orbit......

Bury that quarter under a sheet of paper and see how well that satellite performs!

Tom, the detector you want is not a mass-appeal detector, it is a niche detector. It's the kind of detector that a guy who can afford to own 3 or 4 models would buy, and that kind of detectorist is a 1% kind of market. The overwhelmingly best sellers on the market are detectors that have broad appeal. That's why the AT Pro is selling well; it doesn't do a lot of things especially well, but it does do a lot of things. The Excalbur is arguably a "better" detector, except that the sales numbers say it's not even close.

I happen to think your proposal is a Good Idea but it would have to spin out of an effort that is financially justifiable, i.e. a broad-appeal design. Fortunately FTP is pretty good at doing that.

- Carl

One thing that I'd often wondered is - did Fisher ever try a lower frequency F75, eg. 6.5KHz (half the original) or some other 4K - 8K figure. It sounds like a plausible deep-hitter on the 'milled silver coin' type target, possibly if paired with a slightly larger search-coil. I'm sure it wouldn't be too hard to make a working machine.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/2014 01:24AM by Pimento.

Carl,

First/foremost = You implicate a glimmer of FTP 'hope'. Thanks!

Second = CARL....."It's interesting that your first examples -- Minelab FBS detectors -- are all loaded up with the very stuff you didn't want. I'm curious as to what they have that makes them close to your desired product." ......CARL
ME = Yes/exactly....... the FBS detectors are far from K.I.S.S. ....yet, considering my primary/only intent (and to answer your exact/initial question: "what detector in current production comes closest" ) is to ascertain greater DEPTH. ..... FBS "comes closest". ME

Third = CARL....... "Tom, the detector you want is not a mass-appeal detector, it is a niche detector." CARL
ME = The gold prospecting units (examples such as the 19Khz and 71Khz platforms) are indeed a 'niche' detector (not mass appeal). Yes..... and we know THEIR sales numbers!!! :-) :-)

((( Carl..... I'm giving you 'ammo' ! I'll gladly talk to Tom W..... if necessitates..... via your 'gut/feel'. Last thing I want to see is.... engineer(s) incarcerated in a restricitive/prohibitive proverbial 'box'....with minimal funds, time, resources, trust, creativity and..... most importantly: "belief" ))).

There is full legitimate justification in testimony for 'said' platform. "Niche detector" ??? Yes, but very mildly.

To other concerned forum members: You have concern about "seeing a larger/deeper 'volume' of dirt..... and potentially having greater masking problems" ABSOLUTELY correct! But....... my 'stated/written' intent is:
"Purpose of this unit: Open field(s) whereby targets are sparse; yet, deep."
There are SO many woods, plains, farmers fields, large open meadows/fields where targets are few/far in-between; yet, deep...... with subsequent "eye-opening" significance. This unit would NOT be for parks, schools, around old home sites........ trashy areas.

In the Worldly big-picture of technological advancements on a time-continuum......... XP is tackling 'iron masking' issues. I applaud these accolades.
Now...... in a parallel-world........ let us tackle the 'depth' quest. Independently. Separately. (((They can/will merge in/on some future concerted/collective date))).

Tom

Tom.
As the CZ line only went to 10.5" coils and Sunray built an extinct 12" coil for the CZ line....instead of having to convince Fisher to design a new detector, is it more reasonable to design a larger coil be made for the existing CZ market to get the depth? I will promise to buy a larger coil if Fisher made one for my cz6a......an awful lot of other folks would too.

Tom, does the Whites Sierra Madre come close to this? I am told it is no frills and incredibly deep.

If I'm interpreting Toms depiction of the typical search areas, and their sparse targets, it sounds like an all-metal mode could be used to initially find such targets, and then, a more lengthy, further analysis of the target could be carried out to try and determine the nature of it. All-metal searching (and this includes GMP/Deus-like audio) has the potential to deliver the depth. And non-motion all-metal pinpoint mode easily has the ability to find the sweet-spot, which for convenience you could mark (p0ker chip etc). From this point on, real-time instantaneous reporting is NOT needed. A full even sweep over the target can be performed, the data from the sweep is stored, and then analysed as a whole. Having all this data:- the target peak, and data from both sides of the target for perhaps 50cm / 18 inches+, should present the best opportunity to give an analysis. Repeat this for swings from different angles if need be.

This strategy is inspired in part by a method I use in such search areas, where iron targets are less common, and I'm trying to avoid digging 'definite iron', whilst being prepared to dig just about anything else. I'm also tinkering around with a data-logger attached to a detector, which records a whole sweep, and one place I intend testing it is on the weakest signals, to see what it's limits are. But...it's early days, and I haven't got very far with it yet.

Damn, took me ages to realise my p0ker chip reference was stopping me posting...

Maybe we're looking at this all wrong. Why couldn't something other than a metal detector be able to find coins at depth?

Pimento Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If I'm interpreting Toms depiction of the typical
> search areas, and their sparse targets, it sounds
> like an all-metal mode could be used to initially
> find such targets, and then, a more lengthy,
> further analysis of the target could be carried
> out to try and determine the nature of it.
> All-metal searching (and this includes
> GMP/Deus-like audio) has the potential to deliver
> the depth. And non-motion all-metal pinpoint mode
> easily has the ability to find the sweet-spot,
> which for convenience you could mark (p0ker chip
> etc). From this point on, real-time instantaneous
> reporting is NOT needed. A full even sweep over
> the target can be performed, the data from the
> sweep is stored, and then analysed as a whole.
> Having all this data:- the target peak, and data
> from both sides of the target for perhaps 50cm /
> 18 inches+, should present the best opportunity to
> give an analysis. Repeat this for swings from
> different angles if need be.
>
> This strategy is inspired in part by a method I
> use in such search areas, where iron targets are
> less common, and I'm trying to avoid digging
> 'definite iron', whilst being prepared to dig just
> about anything else. I'm also tinkering around
> with a data-logger attached to a detector, which
> records a whole sweep, and one place I intend
> testing it is on the weakest signals, to see what
> it's limits are. But...it's early days, and I
> haven't got very far with it yet.
>
> Damn, took me ages to realise my p0ker chip
> reference was stopping me posting...


I believe you may be onto something here Pimento,

Are you talking about a process in which once the machine hits a target in static mode - it sort of takes a snapshot of what it sees and the data is then stored for anayalsis in some form but done so instantaneously and then reported back to the user via screen?

I can see this as a working platform if there was like an on-board library of sorts (that can be continually updated) of mega data to compare said target/s one detects as detecting against the on-board library data of conductive-ness of metal being detected and size, shape, etc. along with other info being given via sound/tonally during pinpointing as well as visually via on screen?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/27/2014 02:41AM by MichiganRelicHunter.

You're somewhat over-complicating things with the 'library' idea. All I want from the machine is for it to tell me with some confidence the target is not iron, as a bonus, some indication of low / medium / high conductivity would be useful.
You probably don't need to let the machine know you're about to start a sweep, it would just be continuously sampling, and if it sees a 'peak', it carries on the sample for 1 second, say, then does the analysis. But it wouldn't be difficult to use a trigger-switch just before the sweep, if it made things simpler. Analysis of the sampled data would be near-instant, the result would best be displayed visually, an X-Y graph showing the phase lag over the sweep, plus a 'likely ID' summary.
In addition, I think knowing the level of ground signal would be useful to the machine when doing the sweep analysis. So doing a type of 'ground-grab' would be performed, where rather than just working out the ground phase (with the coil close to the ground), the actual level is recorded, too (a bit like the Fe3O4 meter).This could possibly be incorporated into the sweep - scan the target, at the end of the swing, raise the coil vertically 50cm / 20".

I have some other ideas - if the machine was PI and VLF, then PI mode would find the target initially, then VLF will analyse it, but that's just over-complicating matters.

Geotech Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NASA-Tom Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Carl...... a Minelab Explorer/E-Trac/CTX series,
> a proper CZ (with 10.5" coil), the single freq
> > F75LTD/SE. My gut/feel, giving just one example,
> is that the 25-year old CZ platform has the
> > greatest potential to be advanced via better
> matched components including a more
> > 'resonant/dialed-in' coil...........
>
> It's interesting that your first examples --
> Minelab FBS detectors -- are all loaded up with
> the very stuff you didn't want. I'm curious as to
> what they have that makes them close to your
> desired product.
>
> The company I thought of first that comes closest
> to what you want is Tesoro; take a Tejon and gut a
> few knobs. A better example is the Nexus, it has a
> resonant RX coil. It's the only detector I know of
> that can hit my 24" deep cache (the T2 was
> second). Neither company is burning up the market
> with simple depth.
>
> Also, wideband detectors (FBS, CZ, pulse) can't
> have resonant coils, and so there is no dialing in
> the coil design. Typical production skew on coils
> is at most a few percent, which results in not
> even 1/8" difference in depth. Elsewhere, modern
> SMT circuitry uses 1% components, and critical
> components are hand-matched.
>
> > I suppose part of my startle emanates from: I'm
> stunned that I have Satty's that can read the
> date
> > on a quarter from geosync 17,500 mile
> orbit......
>
> Bury that quarter under a sheet of paper and see
> how well that satellite performs!
>
> Tom, the detector you want is not a mass-appeal
> detector, it is a niche detector. It's the kind of
> detector that a guy who can afford to own 3 or 4
> models would buy, and that kind of detectorist is
> a 1% kind of market. The overwhelmingly best
> sellers on the market are detectors that have
> broad appeal. That's why the AT Pro is selling
> well; it doesn't do a lot of things especially
> well, but it does do a lot of things. The Excalbur
> is arguably a "better" detector, except that the
> sales numbers say it's not even close.
>
> I happen to think your proposal is a Good Idea but
> it would have to spin out of an effort that is
> financially justifiable, i.e. a broad-appeal
> design. Fortunately FTP is pretty good at doing
> that.
>
> - Carl

Wow, Carl, a wise and factual answer as usual. You have to seek what the majority will want. Story is in order here. The company I presently work for hired a plant manager that come from a company that just closed its doors. The company had been very profitable until the board of directors decided to only build custom units to sell its customers. This seemed to be a good idea if there was enough buyers to support the switch. But it turns out the plant with 300+ employees could not be profitable with lower production quotas (because of the custom units) and had to be shut down. Sure wouldn't want that to happen to 1st Texas.

Pimento = Simply: KUDO's mono-homogeneous thought process! (In VLF/IB current-day format).

RodPA = The CZ was platform-based (tuned) for the 8" general purpose coil. It does work quite well with the 10.5" coil (and 5" coil)....... yet, starting to encroach the wrong end of the performance bell-curve. Any larger coil installed...... and the unit bell-curves to sub-par performance resultant. (Hint, hint 2X).

Phil = That would be a 'paradigm shift'. Something of which I have emphatically preached...... until the receiving ears burned out.....in short order...... due to exceptionally small creativity limitations. (((You don't know....what you don't know syndrome))).

Miser = The White's units run into ground mineralization limitations a bit too quick.

markg = Point well taken!!! Yet, there are 2 sides to 'apparent niche' units. Proper designed tool........... then (and this is critical) proper marketing!!! It is hard to sell an awesome tool.......... if you do not.....or..... can not "see" there is a need for it (you don't know.....what you don't know). Years ago...... I could NEVER see the 'need' for a microwave oven & cell phone. Now........... I can not live/function without them.

You will dig 12" for a $40 Seated Liberty dime. Will you dig a few more inches for a $400 Capped Bust dime?

The catalyst has been initiated. The dream is alive. Let the mild-to-wild creative engineering aspirations begin.