northwest The need for big deep gold detectors.
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Monday November 19 2018 10:23:36 AEDT 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.Total forum Topics: 9,052  Total forum Posts:44,942. Members:780 Total page views:12,001,347     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. Guest cannot post and never will be permitted too!Registration of new members must be approved by admin.Anyone known to have any past or present association with Codan/ML or acting on their behalf as a proxy or intermediary  will not have their registration approved.
All moderators from Prospecting Australia (PA) forum are banned. 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.
Unlike Prospecting Australia forum this forum is not run for the financial gain of the owner or admin. Unlike PA forum members here may link to or promote similar other forums without being banned by a group of unstable and inconsistent, faceless moderators/admin and an admin who resides overseas! Unlike  Prospecting Australia  forum this forum does not breach your privacy  by sharing your personal data with any  third party or advertiser unless directed /requested  by an order of the courts. Do you trust Google, Adsense or Amazon  with your personal data? Are you happy to have your personal details stored on an overseas server  and controlled by an  overseas unknown admin? By contrast this forum is hosted on an Australian server and the admin resides in Australia.Unlike  Prospecting Australia you do not have to make 10 posts before you can use the forums personal messaging system!
More QED instruction videos added and testing on  buried nuggets.
QED in WA
"Well two days of detecting in WA and I can report that the QED is performing very well and is handling the conditions without a problem" And is finding gold!
Why pay $200 /year ripoff to be a forum sponsor on Prospecting Australia forum with all the limitations and restrictions placed on you when you can advertise your products/services(except any Codan/ML products/services) here for FREE just by joining this forum!
The designer and manufacturer of the QED will only post on this forum!

australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Detector Technology and Electronics and new detectors  |  Detector Coils  |  Topic: The need for big deep gold detectors. 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 41 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The need for big deep gold detectors.  (Read 22577 times)
mylab
invited members
Newbie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 148


« Reply #20 on: Saturday December 2 2017 15:24:01 AEDT PM »

  

....one the of main factors in detecting larger conductive objects at depth ie the the diameter of the TX coil will ultimately determine the depth at which large  conductive objects can be detected.


If true in regards to a DOD coil as it is with a DD coil then the TX coil on the DOD being elongated and smaller in dimension than the overall dimension of the DOD coil itself then I wonder what the 14"DOD or 19"DOD are equivalent to in a coil?

Aziz could also shed more light on the result?
Logged
sd220d Digger
QED users
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 109


« Reply #21 on: Saturday December 2 2017 19:25:50 AEDT PM »

  
I see that this topic has been raised on SH forum. As  expected JP chimes in and claims the SAD7000 will" thrash" any PI for depth on large nuggets. He of course provides no evidence to substantiate this or any electromagnetic  or electronic or technical reasons as to why this should be so. As usual he only tells half the story and while he refers to the 1/r^6 law he does not say that this is  one the of main factors in detecting larger conductive objects at depth ie the the diameter of the TX coil will ultimately determine the depth at which large  conductive objects can be detected. Corbyn coils were from memory about 36” in diameter. I have no doubt that the late JS modified SD2000 with his 36” coil would thrash the SAD7000  for depth on most very large, solid  highly conductive nuggets.
 The diam of the TX component of the SAD 7000 DOD coil will ultimately  be one of the key factors in determining how deep a large conductive object can be detected. You cannot escape the laws of physics regardless of what signal acquisition/processing wizardry you use!  In addition for large ,highly conductive objects you require a long exposure time to the  energizing Tx field   and the energizing field needs a lot of low frequency spectral content.
doug

Hi Doug and Aziz.

I remember Reg Wilson say that the prototype SD 2000 was the only detector that got a signal on very deep gold nuggets.
Was it because they used more power into the SD than a standard SD?
Logged
sd220d Digger
QED users
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 109


« Reply #22 on: Saturday December 2 2017 19:31:41 AEDT PM »

  
Hi all,

I am just wondering why ML is using a Super-D coil for their GPZ. A concentric IB coil would punch deeper in those mineralized grounds.


Hi Aziz,
Can I pace an order of this coil you talk about for my gpx 5000 detector.?
There's some ground here that cannot be detected at all by any detector with deep gold diggings everywhere there.
Thanks.
Logged
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Online Online

Posts: 16244



« Reply #23 on: Saturday December 2 2017 21:23:00 AEDT PM »

  
  
I see that this topic has been raised on SH forum. As  expected JP chimes in and claims the SAD7000 will" thrash" any PI for depth on large nuggets. He of course provides no evidence to substantiate this or any electromagnetic  or electronic or technical reasons as to why this should be so. As usual he only tells half the story and while he refers to the 1/r^6 law he does not say that this is  one the of main factors in detecting larger conductive objects at depth ie the the diameter of the TX coil will ultimately determine the depth at which large  conductive objects can be detected. Corbyn coils were from memory about 36” in diameter. I have no doubt that the late JS modified SD2000 with his 36” coil would thrash the SAD7000  for depth on most very large, solid  highly conductive nuggets.
 The diam of the TX component of the SAD 7000 DOD coil will ultimately  be one of the key factors in determining how deep a large conductive object can be detected. You cannot escape the laws of physics regardless of what signal acquisition/processing wizardry you use!  In addition for large ,highly conductive objects you require a long exposure time to the  energizing Tx field   and the energizing field needs a lot of low frequency spectral content.
doug

Hi Doug and Aziz.

I remember Reg Wilson say that the prototype SD 2000 was the only detector that got a signal on very deep gold nuggets.
Was it because they used more power into the SD than a standard SD?

I believe it was because of a longer Tx pulse and a higher Tx field strength.
doug
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 hacker and  village idiot!) going to stop telling lies on his “forum”?
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #24 on: Saturday December 2 2017 21:56:43 AEDT PM »

Hi Doug,

  
I see that this topic has been raised on SH forum. As  expected JP chimes in and claims the SAD7000 will" thrash" any PI for depth on large nuggets.
doug

SH forum? Where?
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
mylab
invited members
Newbie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 148


« Reply #25 on: Saturday December 2 2017 22:02:33 AEDT PM »

Quote from: Aziz

[/quote

SH forum? Where?


Here it is Aziz

  
Logged
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #26 on: Saturday December 2 2017 22:07:18 AEDT PM »

  
Hi Aziz,
Can I pace an order of this coil you talk about for my gpx 5000 detector.?
There's some ground here that cannot be detected at all by any detector with deep gold diggings everywhere there.
Thanks.

Hi sd220d Digger,

such a coil concept already exists. But can't be used on GPX detectors as it would require complex modifications.

The coil concept is known as the separate concentric coplanar (large)TX / (small)RX. These coils would go far deeper on mineralized grounds with the benefit of reduced EMI and ground response. I have alreay analyzed this coil concept a few years ago.

Aziz
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #27 on: Saturday December 2 2017 22:11:59 AEDT PM »

  
Quote from: Aziz

[/quote

SH forum? Where?


Here it is Aziz

  

Thanks!
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
sd220d Digger
QED users
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 109


« Reply #28 on: Saturday December 2 2017 23:48:57 AEDT PM »

  
  
Hi Aziz,
Can I pace an order of this coil you talk about for my gpx 5000 detector.?
There's some ground here that cannot be detected at all by any detector with deep gold diggings everywhere there.
Thanks.

Hi sd220d Digger,

such a coil concept already exists. But can't be used on GPX detectors as it would require complex modifications.

The coil concept is known as the separate concentric coplanar (large)TX / (small)RX. These coils would go far deeper on mineralized grounds with the benefit of reduced EMI and ground response. I have alreay analyzed this coil concept a few years ago.

Aziz

I thought there might be a catch and thanks for the reply Aziz.

Some days with the gpx 5000,  there's some ground you know their gold there, but the detector, coil and settings just cannot penetrate through, as the ground is just too mineralized.

I thought I'd ask just in case.
Logged
mylab
invited members
Newbie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 148


« Reply #29 on: Sunday December 3 2017 00:06:42 AEDT AM »

  

 I have already analyzed this coil concept a few years ago.

Aziz

Yes Aziz you certainly did as I remember and had saved your postings from another forum, as it was way back in 2008 when you describe the concentric coplanar (small ) Rx / (Large ) RX then in 2014  using a (large) TX / (small) RX.
Logged
mylab
invited members
Newbie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 148


« Reply #30 on: Sunday December 3 2017 00:30:56 AEDT AM »

  
  
Quote from: Aziz

[/quote

SH forum? Where?


Here it is Aziz

  

Thanks!

In my opinion the video displaying the difference between a GPZ and GPX on the target before it was dug up then there is virtually nothing the GPZ had over the GPX other than the larger purchase price for the GPZ.
Logged
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #31 on: Sunday December 3 2017 09:30:56 AEDT AM »

Now look at this posting by jrbeatty:
  
He shows a nice concentric coplanar coil.
excited
Can't say, whether it is an IB coil or just a separate TX/RX coil (not induction balanced). But it could be well an IB coil.

I'm curious, what JP says this time. And the reaction of the members there.
excited

Someone has obviously studied all my coil analysis results.
happy face
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Online Online

Posts: 16244



« Reply #32 on: Sunday December 3 2017 11:35:07 AEDT AM »

  
Now look at this posting by jrbeatty:
  
He shows a nice concentric coplanar coil.
excited
Can't say, whether it is an IB coil or just a separate TX/RX coil (not induction balanced). But it could be well an IB coil.

I'm curious, what JP says this time. And the reaction of the members there.
excited

Someone has obviously studied all my coil analysis results.
happy face

The last time I was in the shed with Jim at the caravan park he was working on  a big spider wound  litz wire IB  coil. One idea he had was to  be able to adjust the height of the  inner IB coil to assist with GB or nulling over mineralized ground. He could certainly make some good coils! One of his  larger mono coils  on a ML detector was easily the best i have ever seen for depth and  sensitivity. I think it was a once off and some lucky person may now be using it.
doug
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 hacker and  village idiot!) going to stop telling lies on his “forum”?
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Online Online

Posts: 16244



« Reply #33 on: Sunday December 3 2017 13:17:19 AEDT PM »

 Interestingly JRB has posted  on SH's forum that Jim was working on a ground loop system just prior to his death because the depth advantage over conventional coils is "staggering". Developing such a system  will be very challenging.
doug
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 hacker and  village idiot!) going to stop telling lies on his “forum”?
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #34 on: Sunday December 3 2017 21:49:34 AEDT PM »

Hi all,

the QED could have been a GPZ killer with minor changes and using a concentric coplanar IB coils.
I won't publish any details until BW is interested in the depth advantage.
(No, I'm not interested in money. I want to kill the GPZ! *LOL*)
Aziz
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Online Online

Posts: 16244



« Reply #35 on: Sunday December 3 2017 22:13:27 AEDT PM »

  
Hi all,

the QED could have been a GPZ killer with minor changes and using a concentric coplanar IB coils.
I won't publish any details until BW is interested in the depth advantage.
(No, I'm not interested in money. I want to kill the GPZ! *LOL*)
Aziz

I am sure the BW would be interested but  i don't know if the QED would run with a concentric coplanar IB coil.The QED will not run with DD coils. We could kill the GPZ with a small portable QED based ground loop system (a portable mini loop Tx). However their are very major technical challenges to developing such a system  but I  believe it  could be easier than trying to do it for  a ML gpx as  the late JS was.Eric foster also tested a g loop system here some years ago  but  have not heard any more about it.
doug
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 hacker and  village idiot!) going to stop telling lies on his “forum”?
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #36 on: Sunday December 3 2017 23:01:11 AEDT PM »

  
  
Hi all,

the QED could have been a GPZ killer with minor changes and using a concentric coplanar IB coils.
I won't publish any details until BW is interested in the depth advantage.
(No, I'm not interested in money. I want to kill the GPZ! *LOL*)
Aziz

I am sure the BW would be interested but  i don't know if the QED would run with a concentric coplanar IB coil.The QED will not run with DD coils. We could kill the GPZ with a small portable QED based ground loop system (a portable mini loop Tx). However their are very major technical challenges to developing such a system  but I  believe it  could be easier than trying to do it for  a ML gpx as  the late JS was.Eric foster also tested a g loop system here some years ago  but  have not heard any more about it.
doug

Well, the advantage can be implemented on mono coils as well. It only requires small changes in the TX part/snubber cct. If BW can manage separate concentric coplanar (large)TX/(small) RX coil designs in the QED, there is more depth advantage of course. With the concentric coplanar induction balanced coils, it is easier to manage it of course.

Aziz
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
sd220d Digger
QED users
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 109


« Reply #37 on: Monday December 4 2017 00:06:42 AEDT AM »

  
  
  
Hi all,

the QED could have been a GPZ killer with minor changes and using a concentric coplanar IB coils.
I won't publish any details until BW is interested in the depth advantage.
(No, I'm not interested in money. I want to kill the GPZ! *LOL*)
Aziz

I am sure the BW would be interested but  i don't know if the QED would run with a concentric coplanar IB coil.The QED will not run with DD coils. We could kill the GPZ with a small portable QED based ground loop system (a portable mini loop Tx). However their are very major technical challenges to developing such a system  but I  believe it  could be easier than trying to do it for  a ML gpx as  the late JS was.Eric foster also tested a g loop system here some years ago  but  have not heard any more about it.
doug

Well, the advantage can be implemented on mono coils as well. It only requires small changes in the TX part/snubber cct. If BW can manage separate concentric coplanar (large)TX/(small) RX coil designs in the QED, there is more depth advantage of course. With the concentric coplanar induction balanced coils, it is easier to manage it of course.

Aziz

This would be great to see this happening, "the gpz killer"
I know James had his gpx 5000 up there with the gpz and even beat it in some cases.
So, one of these coils modified to be used on my gpx 5000 would make me a happy man. smile
Logged
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #38 on: Monday December 4 2017 08:45:32 AEDT AM »

  
This would be great to see this happening, "the gpz killer"
I know James had his gpx 5000 up there with the gpz and even beat it in some cases.
So, one of these coils modified to be used on my gpx 5000 would make me a happy man. smile

Hi Digger,

I'm not familiar with the coil specifications and internals regarding the gpx 5000. According to the user manual, there is a Double-D mode (besides Monoloop and Cancel), which could allow us to make a pure concentric coplanar IB coil. As I have understood so far, there are only two internal coil windings TX and RX on pure Double-D coils. TX acts additionally as the second RX coil on Monoloop configuration with the Double-D coils.

Whereas the pure mono loop coil has only one internal coil winding (TX=RX).

I think it should be possible to make a pure concentric co-planar induction balanced coil. But I have no details and specifications regarding the coil (particularly the Double-D type of coil).

Aziz
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #39 on: Monday December 4 2017 09:44:42 AEDT AM »

BTW guys,

I have designed a very KISS non-dissipative snubber circuit with TX coil energy recycling. It requires only 3 parts to implement it in the TX circuit. There is no ringing anywhere (this is the real feature, what makes it unique). No additional heat. Longer battery power duration or larger coil current.
The power dissipation of the TX circuit reduces almost to the half compared to the conventional snubber, when the TX coil is in the (almost) linear ramp up region (coil current not saturated).

There comes the depth advantage:
More power to the (larger) coil by keeping the power dissipation same.

This is a very very tricky circuit. BW could implement it in the next QED version with ease I think. I will keep it secret until BW won't be interested in it.
Cheers,
Aziz
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 41 Go Up Print 
australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Detector Technology and Electronics and new detectors  |  Detector Coils  |  Topic: The need for big deep gold detectors. « 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