Nail Board Test Sheet

How does one go about getting this test sheet...

Nail Board test sheet print out

It should fill a 8.5x11 sheet of paper edge to edge. If the sizing is off check your printer settings. I selected "print actual size" and it works perfect. I used scrap Masonite and glued the printout to the board. Then I epoxied the proper nails and sprayed the whole thing with clear to keep down the water damage. I don't use it very often but it does provide a repeatable test platform. Not perfect but miles ahead of nothing. I keep it in my MD box and it comes in handy not just for testing but for showing newbies how and why detectors operate. I think it helps people to visualize what may be going on under the surface.

This Guy may disagree with you Tab...LOL..

[www.youtube.com]

Keith

“I don't care that they stole my idea . . I care that they don't have any of their own”
-Nikola Tesla

That guy hits home with rusty nails.

I know where he's trying to come from but theres a certain closed mindedness that convolutes his presentation.

Keith

“I don't care that they stole my idea . . I care that they don't have any of their own”
-Nikola Tesla



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/19/2015 10:30PM by Keith Southern.

He is or was a meth head...Scratching every other word.

Keith Southern Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know where he's trying to come from but theres a
> certain closed mindedness that convolutes his
> presentation.
>
> Keith

Yep. That was interesting but not very informative.

Monte's NBPT is simple and that is actually a strength. It is at least something we can all get pretty close to making repeatable tests. I think that test consistency shows up in many videos and is born out by results in the feedback when people get out in the fields after switching coils, or machines or settings as a result of the test. It's obvious it doesn't account for variables like burying the targets under ground, various depth levels of the nails and targets, etc. Duh. This could go on forever. But it is a basic easy thing all of us can use to explore at least one important facet of machine performance, iron masking. And it's cheap if not free. Like I said, I have found it to be a real good tool to demo machines to people that aren't aware of how iron impacts VDI readings, masking, nulling, etc.

But if that guy has some methods of finding stuff in the conditions he is in, I couldn't care less because I still am not clear on what he was talking about. However if those 950 coils are his primary coils I bet he would do much better with a 6 or 8 inch coil in the trash.

Monte is really objective and extremely detailed and constantly seems to question himself on whether he is really has a good answer or if he has missed something. Plus many years of experience. Not to suck up but I always watch people like Keith, Monte, Steve, Dan, and a few others to see how they approach testing and assessing equipment. I take a little from all of them (and others on the forums) to try and apply what would work best in MY conditions for MY needs. I've been through a number of machines (like the guy in the vid) and as a result I have learned from every machine I've owned whether I liked it or not, or sold it because I didn't think it met my needs.

I think Will is on to something.

I have a simple test that all the detectors that I have tried failed miserably at. Just carry or find a rusty medium sized square nail about 3½" long and then find a coin signal, place the nail on top of your just found coin signal and see what happens. this is of coarse a disc. setting that barely knocks out a nail or tone breaks on a nail. Then just move the nail an inch away from the signal, can you hear it? Keep moving the nail until you can hear it. It is an eye opener for sure and a good way to see how fast of a recovery your detector has.

A nail board test simulates a real-world situation where ferrous and non-ferrous is adjacent on the same plane. It isn't supposed to represent every conceivable orientation of the two metals - by why should it? It is a bit tiresome to constantly have any objective testing poo-pooed because it isn't representative of all possible targets or arrangement of targets. If your detector can't alert on a non-ferrous coin in the nail board test above ground - under the same arrangement underground - it won't either. It's a reasonable test - one that many detectors fail (hence the need to discount it).

He mentioned the infamous ubiquitous be-all-and-end-all explanation for anything not understood - i.e., the "halo" effect ... as if a ferrous "halo", in the ground, will invalidate a nail-board test above ground. Nonsense. The criminal is elongated ferrous with its high permeability that distorts the magnetic field, not "halo". As long as elongated ferrous is present the magnetic field will be vectored through the iron and the non-ferrous target will likely suffer. Some detectors do better either through coil design or processing methods, or both, and the nail test is a valid method to identify which detectors are better at it. I've tested the FBS machines extensively and while the CTX does somewhat better it is generally non-ferrous dead when elongated iron is present in close proximity, depending upon the relative three-dimensional arrangement of the iron and coin, of course.

We need more testing, not less.