CZ owners - Salt training 101

mrh, its not just the cz20/21!!!! any machine that is designed to be used in saltwater has the same issue! your at-pro, a tesoro tigershark, or any waterproof machine that can be used outside of saltmode would be a better choice when it comes to tiny gold in freshwater! go back to the beginning of page one on this thread and read the whole thing if you have not done so already! very enlightening!!!!
chuck

tom, or anyone with the technical ability to answer this question or comment on its feasibility.

how possible would it be to use a cpu/processer added to a pulse induction or multi freq machine to pick out/ isolate a gold target that very nearly/ almost exactly matches the conductinity of the salt enviroment that surrounds it?
i understand that a gold item at 2 inches and the same item at 8 inches will have a different conductivity value , what i'm thinking is that if the machine was setup/programed to see a small but slightly different value(the gold item) inside a relatively constant larger value(the salt content) even though only slightly different, the cpu/processer could isolate the gold and eliminate the salt.

we are using some pretty high power handheld devices now(cell phones, tablets) that meet or surpass what our desktop cpu's were capable of just a few years ago! i would think that very exact signal isolation would be possible that may not have been possible even 5 years ago.

.....by the way, how much effort has ever been put into a machine that was designed exclusivly as a saltwater/beach gold prospecting unit? forget the general purpose or waterproofed land machines, forget coins(as much as possible), if a machines sole purpose/ design intent was to find gold in saltwater would that alone be an improvement?? and yes, the market is there now!
chuck

Thats a pretty good range.... from ferr at depths to around a penny. Then you have conductive salt water right there where we want to be for for the smaller targets. Id like to see a machine that would ID a gold chain and still operate IN the water.... then we are in business. But the smaller we go ... like turning down the disc... the more undesirable targets we tend to include.

Dew

dewcon4414 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thats a pretty good range.... from ferr at depths to around a penny. Then you have conductive salt water right there where we want to be for for the smaller targets.Id like to see a machine that> would ID a goldchain and still operate IN the water.... then we are in business. But the smaller we go ... like turning down the disc... the more undesirable targets we tend to include.
> Dew

yes, the range is broad! but for now,.... for this dicussion im not even concerned with the lower percentage gold finds that id as a high coin!!! im talking about foil through tab or nickle.....the highest percentage of lost gold! once you start hitting the "high coin gold" the salt is no longer a problem.
i understand the problem of salt vs gold conductivity but im thinking a" real" cpu/processor could pull the slightly different signal out of the mix.
chuck.

It's not a matter of splitting hairs...... via a microprocessor. It's more like (with a metal detector) looking for a lost lug nut at a auto salvage junk yard. If the bulk of the gold lost on the wet salt beach ... is the same conductivity as the wet salt............ even a lightening fast microprocessor can not delineate. Looking for a 'clear' water balloon (filled with water) in a swimming pool .... is futile. Nothing can see it.

But........... gold is substantially more dense than quartz/sand/silica and salt water. You would think.................... **************

Tom are you saying density of various metals can be measured accurately much like the regenerated magnetic fields currently being used?

Dew

Tangential implication......... yes.

Conductivity of salt water in relation/comparison to gold . . . you hear quite often the two are so close and sometimes
stretch that into exactly the same?

There is a conductivity chart in the free Garrett Book I got with my AT Pro and it looked to me that there was a noticable
difference between the two? But . . .

I'm sure the conductivity of salt water varies a great deal because of salinity, water temperature, currents, oxygen content,
polution, sunlight, fresh water run offf etc. . .all vary quite a bit.

So I think it is unlikely to nail down a specific value for the conductivity of salt water but in general is just believed to be very
close to gold? And just about any amount seems to hinder the MD Process a great deal.

So it is . . . what it is . . . Then you have sink rate and MD's that have no punch.

It's like Tom says . . . this hobby is many years overdue for a paradigm shift in technology.
Current technology has been beat to death . . . with few exceptions . . . ML.

Well, this is exactly the kind of learning I was looking for for weeks, simply put, Empirical observations. Thankyou Nasa for sharing your expertise with us all. The Irony here is I am now not convinced that a PI unit is the best step forward, . So at least that avenue is closed down.

What is IRT? In real time?

supertraq Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What is IRT? In real time?


Take your pick: [www.abbreviations.com] but I don't want to leave you in despair, I believe there is a latent period between transmit and receive, similar to radio and internet. Efficiency in closing this gap leads to Faster response and quicker recovery in the context of VLF, in PI I presume it there is a quiet moment between 'transmit' - 'switch off' - 'switch on' (the received signal this part would be the beep in your ears). Closing this gap makes for a more efficient PI so I am lead to understand.

Salt........ for the most part; yes/correct.

IRT = In Reference To

Oh,simple meaning.
I'm thinking it was some metal detector gargon I had not heard yet.

First...... the detector MUST see a target to begin with....... to then........ secondarily....... produce an audio response (which....... then......... headphones now come into play).

"Threshold" is a interesting thing. If there is no threshold heard............... and you increase the threshold up to (just under an audible report).......... you have increased performance. If you increase the threshold even higher...... to where (now) you can hear a very slight hum.......... the result becomes different. You (now) may or may NOT gain any additional performance. I have one CZ whereby......... when I keep the threshold 'hum' JUST BARELY below audible (so the detector is completely silent)........ then...... any 'break' in audio ...from ""no audio heard"" ...to ANY form of ANY SOUND produced...... (a audio response)..... and I then know I have a target. This is also a fatigue-free no-brainer set-up configuration: No sound....... no dig. Audio response.......... DIG! (This is my "make noise"...... DIG! configuration).
On another (different) CZ......... my best performance comes from a setting whereby there IS a mild audio threshold present........ and if there is any slight 'warble' (or change) in the threshold.......... I then know I have a 'fringe' target. This particular unit........................... if I set the threshold to 'just barely' under any audible sound......... it will lose a slight amount of depth/performance. Which brings yet ANOTHER (potential) problem into the equation. . . . . and you must be aware of. IF IF the threshold hum is increased FROM 'mild/light-volume' ......... TO medium-volume threshold hum............. ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ............. the fringe depth targets are now overpowered by this higher volume threshold hum AND/OR ...... there is not enough audio-differential (at this higher volume threshold setting) for the human ear to discern/differentiate; subsequently, the deep target is missed. (DEW....... I'm going to post this on the forum....... as it's possibly 'value-added' // worth sharing.)

Thanks for posting the response you gave me to my question on this Tom. I know it can pertain to any detector as i had asked this about the Xcal. So, you know the Xcal is a different animal in PP. This would apply a bit differently.... well maybe. I normally set my threshold as low as possible before switching over to PP........ but there isnt any threshold once switched to PP (AM) unless you turn it up more. Since its not really processing a tone....... can that gain more response to the target or am i right in leaving it once set for disc hunting? Will those weak signals still not come thru with a bit of threshold in PP? Much faster response in PP without waiting for the machine to recover in disc.

Dew

Dew........ because there is a lot of 'analog' in the Excal........ I strongly recommend trying (just barely) no threshold ....... the way you have been. And...... try a bit of a threshold before switching over to pinpoint mode. Try both of these settings on a fringe depth target. Your PP mode most probably circumvents the threshold circuitry; yet, it may have an effect. And...................... what may work on one Excal........ may be slightly different on another Excal (due to a lot of analog circuitry).

I know that on a Fisher Gold Bug-2......... supposedly the threshold adjust on the back of the control housing is deactivated whilst NOT in all-metal mode; however, I find the contrary.

NASA-Tom,

Summer beach trips are being planned and I just got through reading this entire thread. Many thanks for all the information!! I know this thread was started almost 6 years ago, but have any real advances been made in being able to identify small gold objects in wet salt conditions? What are your current recommendations for finding the small gold at the beach? I have the Gold Bug 2 for the dry sand. What about the wet and in the water? Thanks for any help.

Norm

It hurts to say this;

Still..... the Minelab Excal (or Sov)................. and the Fisher CZ are still the only wet-salt beach hunting units. They are 1990 (1/4 Century-old) technology. The CTX-3030 and E-Trac/Explorer series units are in the same boat as the Excal/Sov.
In any case....... none of these units will find tiny...... and certainly not 'micro' jewelry in the wet salt. Technology has not advanced there yet.

I have (probably one of the hottest) AquaStar-II PI units on planet Earth................ which has tuitionally educated me to the stunning epiphany of just how many tiny gold items are undetectable in the wet salt. . . . . . however; there is a heavy price to pay .... in order to ascertain this tuition; .................... that being........ digging large volumes of ferromagnetic implements (due in full to PI's not having Disc capabilities). And still........... micro-jewelry remains completely undetectable..... with current-day technology.
This is a area that still remains wide open for opportunistic entrepreneurial 'capital gain'.

'bump' for possum

Here’s a really solid thread which ran for 5 years or so and covers in great detail the ins and outs of salt beach detecting.

Thanks Tom.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

lytle78 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here’s a really solid thread which ran for 5 years
> or so and covers in great detail the ins and outs
> of salt beach detecting.
>
> Thanks Tom.


Tom was eluding to fact that when a VLF is compensated for wet salt, the micro gold is gone.

Up to my ____ in Pulltabs, Grant



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/02/2019 01:40AM by Up to my ____ in Pulltabs, Grant.

It's great to see this kind of testing being engaged in The sense I get is that the EQ has brought in a lot of hunters who don't really have the patience to test, study theory or basic--the things that bring about real detecting success. Many don't even have the patience to wait for my book and feel it's appropriate to "come after" me after a few days. Won't be doing another one--too many "crackheads."cjc

Since the advent of this thread...…………. can you see where we are 'starting' to change this dilemma?
(((Think Tarsacci…… and EQX))).

Interesting encounter. Food-for-thought.
I wet-salt beach hunted...… on the wet slope: Friday, Saturday, Sunday. . . . . . in the EXACT same spot....each consecutive day.

Friday = 27 Zinc pennies. 80 pieces of various aluminum trash.
Saturday = 27 Copper pennies. 7 pieces of various aluminum trash.
Sunday = 2 golds, 3 Silvers. 6 lead sinkers. No coins. No aluminum trash.

"WHAT" changed/happened???!!!

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting encounter. Food-for-thought.
> I wet-salt beach hunted...… on the wet slope: Frid
> ay, Saturday, Sunday. . . . . . in the EXACT same
> spot....each consecutive day.
>
> Friday = 27 Zinc pennies. 80 pieces of various alu.....
> minum trash.
> Saturday = 27 Copper pennies. 7 pieces of various
> aluminum trash.
> Sunday = 2 golds, 3 Silvers. 6 lead sinkers. No co
> ins. No aluminum trash.
>
> "WHAT" changed/happened???!!!

In that order from new to older to deep is my guess....how many tide changes is that, 6? Any quick storms come through? You only used the same CZ? Same coil? Same time hunting every day? EMI changes? I'm just brain storming here....it is baffling, but there is a truth there somewhere,... interesting.

Hunted low tide every day.
Used Tarsacci every day.
Used Same coil every day.
Near-zero EMI every day.
Four tide-changes every day. (Two high-tides, two low-tides in a 24-hour period).

107 targets day one, 34 targets day two, 11 targets day three. All the keepers were day three.

The targets changed by density every day.

The light density screamers came out on day 1, the medium density targets on day two and the high density targets on day three. You didn't find the high density targets on day 1 because the number of low density screamers took over your brain/mental focus.

My thought.
HH
Mike

Tom,

Are you hunting North Brevard beaches, Atlantic east coast?

I live in South Brevard but drive south to Indian River county and hunt the Treasure coast beaches. The sand movement lately can be several feet per day due to these cold fronts. 1715 fleet artifacts can be exposed one day and several feet under the next. There is a slight curve to the coast down here which probably accentuates the sand movement. You're closer to the Cape which probably blocks the sand movement a bit.

Machines that give a few inch advantage are not really the answer down here. It's catching that moment and I mean "moment" when that sand is pulled off the beach.

One day the beach staircases are hanging several feet above the beach, the next day they can be buried in sand.

I think you are experiencing the beaches sorting effect with a little erosion effect on top of it.

Tom D, Wonder the outcome would have been if you went over the area three times consecutively.....one after the other, same day.

Steve alluded it...…. and Robocop experienced it!
Yes. Exactly. Erosion. Due to cold fronts. North. North East winds.
I would say..... 4' to 6' of Florida shoreline...… deployed out to sea.
And...…….. it appears...… ( by day 3)….. around 13" - 15" of sand had been stripped away.
Any time sand is stripped away...… the light/low-density targets 'deploy' out to sea. Heavy stuff is left behind.
Each consecutive day...…. sand was getting harder and harder. This is the resultant of a sharp/distinct lateral water shear...…. causing a 'clean cut' (and removal) of the top layer of sand...…. and NOT 'churning' the sand (which buries heavier targets....to greater depths).
Today I hunted the EXACT same spot again...…. and found zero targets. Looks to be about 9" of sand was redeposited back on to the wet slope.