northwest If we are serious about a VLF deep , mega nugget detector!
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Monday May 20 2019 04:34:46 AEST AM
Home Help Login Register
News: Welcome to the Australianelectronicgoldprospectingforum founded in July 2010, an add free totally independent forum with over 70 boards and paid for and managed by the Admin.Topics: 9,245  Total forum Posts:46,142 Members:809. Total page views:12,263,130  Admin and  forum and domain name owner :marjen at optusnet.com.au. Guests can only see a limited number of boards at present and cannot see any hot links. Guests cannot post and never will be permitted too!Registration of new members must be approved by admin.
 All  original Photos and posts and  original materials displayed on this site are COPYRIGHTED and remain the property of the poster and the  Austalian electronicgoldprospectingforum.com. All messages on this forum express the personal views of the author and should not be interpreted as necessarily being in accord with those of the forum owner and neither the owner of this forum and its domain name nor SMF or the forum software developers or the forum host shall be held responsible for the content of any message. Admin reserves the right to remove any offensive or objectionable posts. No defamatory material or politics/religion or issues of race will be permitted.
Climate news
Contribution to global warming by Australia. Australia has one of the highest per capita emissions of carbon dioxide in the world, with 0.3% of the world's population it produces 1.4% and rising(not the .08% the  finders forum dope "Inhere" claims!) of the world's greenhouse gases. Australia also has the highest per capita emissions in the OECD, with 26 tonnes of greenhouse gasses being emitted per person every year.

australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Detector Technology and Electronics and new detectors  |  Detector Coils (Moderator: Goldman)  |  Topic: If we are serious about a VLF deep , mega nugget detector! 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Go Down Print
Author Topic: If we are serious about a VLF deep , mega nugget detector!  (Read 1423 times)
Dontbstme
regular members
Junior Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 200


« Reply #60 on: Thursday January 31 2019 20:05:03 AEDT PM »

  

Dontbsme... There is no massive bias against vlf. Many here have used them on the goldfields before Pi became the norm. You assume members don't know.
  I am glad you will be coming down to test yourself.
As to me not giving any unit a fair test, that's simply not true..

As to me trolling... If that's what you call a response to claims fine


Cheers

Muntari


Those VLF detectors were not Nexus Standard MP.
Since you have attributed words to me that I have not used my self I have no idea what to call it but bias.
Claims that you have exaggerated greatly (as if I made them) and then went on a rant. Tat's what I call trolling.

I hope we are clear now and can have more calm and normal conversation.
Logged
Muntari
invited members
Junior Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #61 on: Thursday January 31 2019 20:17:55 AEDT PM »

  
  

Dontbsme... There is no massive bias against vlf. Many here have used them on the goldfields before Pi became the norm. You assume members don't know.
  I am glad you will be coming down to test yourself.
As to me not giving any unit a fair test, that's simply not true..

As to me trolling... If that's what you call a response to claims fine


Cheers

Muntari


Those VLF detectors were not Nexus Standard MP.
Since you have attributed words to me that I have not used my self I have no idea what to call it but bias.
Claims that you have exaggerated greatly (as if I made them) and then went on a rant. Tat's what I call trolling.

I hope we are clear now and can have more calm and normal conversation.


Your words imply members here don't know about in Vlf/IB
The words I posted implied I was over claims made by anyone who implies they have the best...
You can't take everyone literally.
You call it a rant..that's fine. Trolling. Hardly.
I will assume you have a great detector design but  please don't assume everyone else on this site has no knowledge.
Can we now revert to pleasant calm conversation..that would be good

Cheers

Muntari
Logged

All posts submitted by myself to this forum are my opinion and are done so without prejudice
GARY
invited members
Junior Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 487


« Reply #62 on: Thursday January 31 2019 20:48:03 AEDT PM »

  

Thanks for sharing Gary. As Doug suggested a bigger target is required to do this test. So if you can make a lump of Lead or Tin as big as your huge copper nugget this would demonstrate better if PI would show preference over one metal or another.

In IB detectors the huge copper nugget will give a strong response in the discrimination channel and relatively weak audio, where a similar size Lead will produce strong audio, but weak discrimination response.

I would like to have your copper beast for testing around here, before I get to Australia to have basis of comparison. I know many will say, but this soil, that soil ect.

For me a single test piece is a good staring point of comparison between soil conditions as my MP detector has a multi turn dial for the GB which makes it easy to compare one soil condition to another.


Thanks for your reply.

Unfortunately where I detect my ground is not as mineralised as the majority of ground in the Golden Triangle in Victoria and the large size nuggets that exist there at depth, as I am not close.

However if and when you travel to Australia the ground in the Golden Triangle would be a good place to test your detectors and coils.

Gary.
Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 16663



« Reply #63 on: Thursday January 31 2019 21:14:27 AEDT PM »

  
  

Thanks for sharing Gary. As Doug suggested a bigger target is required to do this test. So if you can make a lump of Lead or Tin as big as your huge copper nugget this would demonstrate better if PI would show preference over one metal or another.

In IB detectors the huge copper nugget will give a strong response in the discrimination channel and relatively weak audio, where a similar size Lead will produce strong audio, but weak discrimination response.

I would like to have your copper beast for testing around here, before I get to Australia to have basis of comparison. I know many will say, but this soil, that soil ect.

For me a single test piece is a good staring point of comparison between soil conditions as my MP detector has a multi turn dial for the GB which makes it easy to compare one soil condition to another.


Thanks for your reply.

Unfortunately where I detect my ground is not as mineralised as the majority of ground in the Golden Triangle in Victoria and the large size nuggets that exist there at depth, as I am not close.

However if and when you travel to Australia the ground in the Golden Triangle would be a good place to test your detectors and coils.

Gary.


Testing in WA would also be necessary because  some WA ground may be worse than that in the GT where we don't for example have lateritic soils.
WA also  has conductive soils on the margins of salt lakes.
doug smile
Logged

All posts on this forum are the personal views of the author and should  not necessarily be  interpreted as those of Admin.
When is 1halfgram4three (a proven forum hacker and  village idiot!) going to stop telling lies on his “forum”?
Muntari
invited members
Junior Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 406


« Reply #64 on: Thursday January 31 2019 22:31:25 AEDT PM »

  
  
  

Thanks for sharing Gary. As Doug suggested a bigger target is required to do this test. So if you can make a lump of Lead or Tin as big as your huge copper nugget this would demonstrate better if PI would show preference over one metal or another.

In IB detectors the huge copper nugget will give a strong response in the discrimination channel and relatively weak audio, where a similar size Lead will produce strong audio, but weak discrimination response.

I would like to have your copper beast for testing around here, before I get to Australia to have basis of comparison. I know many will say, but this soil, that soil ect.

For me a single test piece is a good staring point of comparison between soil conditions as my MP detector has a multi turn dial for the GB which makes it easy to compare one soil condition to another.


Thanks for your reply.

Unfortunately where I detect my ground is not as mineralised as the majority of ground in the Golden Triangle in Victoria and the large size nuggets that exist there at depth, as I am not close.

However if and when you travel to Australia the ground in the Golden Triangle would be a good place to test your detectors and coils.

Gary.


Testing in WA would also be necessary because  some WA ground may be worse than that in the GT where we don't for example have lateritic soils.
WA also  has conductive soils on the margins of salt lakes.
doug smile

I agree with Doug, GT and WA would give the best overall test

cheers

muntari
Logged

All posts submitted by myself to this forum are my opinion and are done so without prejudice
Dontbstme
regular members
Junior Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 200


« Reply #65 on: Thursday January 31 2019 23:33:12 AEDT PM »

  


Thanks for your reply.

Unfortunately where I detect my ground is not as mineralised as the majority of ground in the Golden Triangle in Victoria and the large size nuggets that exist there at depth, as I am not close.

However if and when you travel to Australia the ground in the Golden Triangle would be a good place to test your detectors and coils.

Gary.


I have a couple of questions if you don't mind.

On your soil conditions where is not so mineralised as the Golden circle, can you tell me on average what sensitivity level you use when it is dry and when it is wet and with what size coil?

If you are to test your big copper how deep would you expect to get it on your soil?

Cheers.
Logged
Reg Wilson
invited members
Newbie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 69


« Reply #66 on: Friday February 1 2019 00:10:00 AEDT AM »

Dontbstme, with all due respect, your question is inane. The soil, subsoil, and bedrock conditions vary so much as to make your request impossible to grade or answer. There is a big difference between ground riddled with ironstone dykes, intrusions and conglomerates to areas where gold has been left stranded on most innate decomposing granite or kaolin. These are extremes, with many different soil conditions in between, all giving different responses. In Western Australia we high levels of salt, and Laterites which present their own problems. I can't see you getting the information or experience any other way beyond actually being here.
Logged
GARY
invited members
Junior Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 487


« Reply #67 on: Friday February 1 2019 00:31:28 AEDT AM »

  
  


Thanks for your reply.

Unfortunately where I detect my ground is not as mineralised as the majority of ground in the Golden Triangle in Victoria and the large size nuggets that exist there at depth, as I am not close.

However if and when you travel to Australia the ground in the Golden Triangle would be a good place to test your detectors and coils.

Gary.


I have a couple of questions if you don't mind.

On your soil conditions where is not so mineralised as the Golden circle, can you tell me on average what sensitivity level you use when it is dry and when it is wet and with what size coil?

If you are to test your big copper how deep would you expect to get it on your soil?

Cheers.



Okay I will try to answer your questions.

In regards to the sensitivity level then when dry I am currently using it on average between 5 & 2 positions below maximum with a 12” FW mono coil. As for wet I have not used it when conditions are wet.  

In regards to the big copper then l have not tested it under the ground however from what I read in a posting of yours on Geotech back in 2017 you said the following so I  hope you do not mind me quote you here on what you said : “ My experience with GPX 5000 and  Garrett ATX shows that there is no difference between air and in ground test with them. At least non that I can measure out of the random error level. The reason for PI not to lose depth in ground is simple. It does not discriminate ground interference like IB detectors. Now there are those who insist that a PI goes actually deeper in ground especially in mineralised soil, but I have found no evidence of this”

Therefore having not tested my biggest copper piece in ground and only air tested using several PI’s set in their strongest setting with the same 18” mono coil then if the air depth result being the same as if the big copper was in the ground, as you appear to say, then I would expect a depth underground at 3ft or 36”.

Unfortunately due to high mineralised ground here in OZ those strongest settings are unable to be used all the time with a mono coil and the DD coil was required to help tame the ground in which case the depth result I achieved in air with an 18"DD was 34".

Later models of PIs have allowed the use of mono coils in hotter ground with a certain amount of depth loss as you would no doubt be aware when you had the GPX 5000 if your ground over there required you to use its settings to tame a mono coil over high mineralised ground.


Gary.




Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
Dontbstme
regular members
Junior Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 200


« Reply #68 on: Friday February 1 2019 03:02:39 AEDT AM »

  



Okay I will try to answer your questions.

In regards to the sensitivity level then when dry I am currently using it on average between 5 & 2 positions below maximum with a 12” FW mono coil. As for wet I have not used it when conditions are wet.  

In regards to the big copper then l have not tested it under the ground however from what I read in a posting of yours on Geotech back in 2017 you said the following so I  hope you do not mind me quote you here on what you said : “ My experience with GPX 5000 and  Garrett ATX shows that there is no difference between air and in ground test with them. At least non that I can measure out of the random error level. The reason for PI not to lose depth in ground is simple. It does not discriminate ground interference like IB detectors. Now there are those who insist that a PI goes actually deeper in ground especially in mineralised soil, but I have found no evidence of this”

Therefore having not tested my biggest copper piece in ground and only air tested using several PI’s set in their strongest setting with the same 18” mono coil then if the air depth result being the same as if the big copper was in the ground, as you appear to say, then I would expect a depth underground at 3ft or 36”.

Unfortunately due to high mineralised ground here in OZ those strongest settings are unable to be used all the time with a mono coil and the DD coil was required to help tame the ground in which case the depth result I achieved in air with an 18"DD was 34".

Later models of PIs have allowed the use of mono coils in hotter ground with a certain amount of depth loss as you would no doubt be aware when you had the GPX 5000 if your ground over there required you to use its settings to tame a mono coil over high mineralised ground.


Gary.






You told me all I needed to know Gary. Thank you.
If this slab of copper (the huge one) is not too precious to you, would you consider sending it over to me so I can run some measurements on the same piece? I'll pay the two way shipping what ever it is.
Logged
GARY
invited members
Junior Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 487


« Reply #69 on: Friday February 1 2019 11:02:50 AEDT AM »

  

You told me all I needed to know Gary. Thank you.

If this slab of copper (the huge one) is not too precious to you, would you consider sending it over to me so I can run some measurements on the same piece? I'll pay the two way shipping what ever it is.


First of all I need to CORRECT the figure I said above for the large copper test piece at 3ft or 36” as that result was for a 15oz lead target which is displayed in the photo of my reply #6  in my ” Imitating Gold Nuggets” thread.

Also there are further results in that reply #6 for the test pieces in the photo.

Therefore a check of my test records actually show the large copper piece air tested with 18" mono coil at 41” . (1.04 Metres)

As far as sending my large copper test piece over to you for testing, unfortunately No.

Gary.
Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
GARY
invited members
Junior Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 487


« Reply #70 on: Friday February 1 2019 12:09:02 AEDT PM »

Here is pic of some other of my copper test pieces which are precious to me...and if only they were gold...

As I've said I have an addiction with testing.

Gary


* Copper Test Pieces (Small).jpg (183.07 KB, 813x480 - viewed 70 times.)
Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
Dontbstme
regular members
Junior Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 200


« Reply #71 on: Saturday February 2 2019 06:24:25 AEDT AM »

  
Here is pic of some other of my copper test pieces which are precious to me...and if only they were gold...

As I've said I have an addiction with testing.

Gary
I was out today to test my two box on mineralised soil. It was also very muddy after raining there for days apparently. It just stopped last night.
The mineral level is not comparative to the Golden Triangle for sure, but high enough to trow in the bin the XP Deus with its latest coil and software. It was disabled there and the operator is one of the foremost competent users of this detector in BG. He is also an XP dealer.

What ever. After ground balance it turn out my two box did not require any kind of compensation for the level of magnetite and hot rocks in that area. Also my simulated nugget 600 grams on the picture below was detectable at 60" in air. This basically means in that soil this piece will be detectable at about 45"max.
My 8" hammered copper bucket was detectable at 75" in air.



* 9304fbd2-590c-44a7-b459-6fabde587b92.jpg (162.79 KB, 1600x1200 - viewed 50 times.)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Go Up Print 
australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Detector Technology and Electronics and new detectors  |  Detector Coils (Moderator: Goldman)  |  Topic: If we are serious about a VLF deep , mega nugget detector! « previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder

BisdakworldClassic design by JV PACO-IN
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
gold