northwest Detecting Larger Nuggets
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Tuesday November 19 2019 16:39:40 AEDT PM
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: 9,612  Total forum Posts:47,584 Members:861. Total page views:12,976,190  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.
QED news
QED on facebook
link-https://www.facebook.com/groups/245308699667153/403446933853328/?comment_id=403472030517485&reply_comment_id=403476793850342&notif_id=1562580344994993&notif_t=group_comment
Interfacion Pty Ltd is pleased to announce that the QED PI Detector has been modified to allow the use of DD (double D) coils. This change involves a simple change to the electronics within the control box.
The firmware has also been upgraded to include a further improved Ground Balance.
All detectors being delivered to new customers from Monday 5th August 2019 will already have the above upgrades included.
As a show of commitment to all QED owners, the hardware modification to allow use of the DD and CC coils will be provided at no cost.
Of course and as per the QED warranty, the firmware update is provided free of charge, except for P&H.
Any QED owner who plans to attend the Laanecoorie Bash is encouraged to bring their detector along and have it upgraded at no cost.
Standard postage and handling arrangements apply to other owners. Send via Australia Post the box (minus batteries) along with a pre-paid, pre-addressed bag/box to:
Interfacion Pty Ltd
PO Box 106R
Redan VIC 3350
Howard Rockey
Director Interfacion Pty Ltd.

australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Common interest forum.  |  General chat and discussion forum (Moderator: bugwhiskers)  |  Topic: Detecting Larger Nuggets 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Detecting Larger Nuggets  (Read 5505 times)
Huego
invited members
Revered Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4094



« on: Friday January 16 2015 17:14:47 AEDT PM »


There is a general perception that larger nuggets are (or should be) more easily detected (ie detected deeper). 
That is, the bigger the target, the easier it is, or should be, to detect at depth.

     - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
     - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
     - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

Allan says larger nuggets “have LONG TIME CONSTANTS” … OK, but what does that mean to a detectorist in selecting tools (eg detectors, coils), optimising settings or selecting ideal conditions for searching for them? …. from a prospectors, not designers, point of view. 

How can one maximise the detection or detection depth for large nuggets (1 oz + say)? 
Does one seek or avoid certain geology shallow or deep ground or soil type, always use largest coil, which detector settings? Generalities, not detail.

Perhaps Alluvium can do this from a successful (big nugget finder’s) point of view? If he were looking for a big nuggets (1+ oz) what tools would he want need to find them at depths over 30 cm? 

Huego  happy face
Logged

Views expressed are without prejudice, in the public/consumer interest & their "right to know". Huego reserves his right to: think freely & speculate, make & correct his mistakes, change his mind, expose fools & denigrators if/as required. Fighting greed & injustice with facts as he sees them.
moodz
restricted
Hero Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 813


« Reply #1 on: Friday January 16 2015 21:33:50 AEDT PM »

  

There is a general perception that larger nuggets are (or should be) more easily detected (ie detected deeper). 
That is, the bigger the target, the easier it is, or should be, to detect at depth.

     - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
     - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
     - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

Allan says larger nuggets “have LONG TIME CONSTANTS” … OK, but what does that mean to a detectorist in selecting tools (eg detectors, coils), optimising settings or selecting ideal conditions for searching for them? …. from a prospectors, not designers, point of view. 

How can one maximise the detection or detection depth for large nuggets (1 oz + say)? 
Does one seek or avoid certain geology shallow or deep ground or soil type, always use largest coil, which detector settings? Generalities, not detail.

Perhaps Alluvium can do this from a successful (big nugget finder’s) point of view? If he were looking for a big nuggets (1+ oz) what tools would he want need to find them at depths over 30 cm? 

Huego  happy face


Any detector with a ground balance cct whether auto or manual is old hat ...its gonna ignore some nugg sizes at depth. The ground does not need to be balanced it needs to be ignored ... the wanna be's are trying to improve old methods ...the new tech like cc ferinstance ignores ground without balancing ccts. Time constants dont matter only signal to noise ratio.
Logged
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 16888



« Reply #2 on: Friday January 16 2015 22:22:33 AEDT PM »

  
... the wanna be's are trying to improve old methods ...the new tech like cc ferinstance ignores ground without balancing ccts. Time constants dont matter only signal to noise ratio.

Can this be achieved by methods other than sampling during CC periods?
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”?
moodz
restricted
Hero Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 813


« Reply #3 on: Friday January 16 2015 22:31:49 AEDT PM »

  
  
... the wanna be's are trying to improve old methods ...the new tech like cc ferinstance ignores ground without balancing ccts. Time constants dont matter only signal to noise ratio.

Can this be achieved by methods other than sampling during CC periods?
doug smile

Its the addition \ subtraction of samples filtering the ground but also filtering some targets that matters otherwise you can sample all the time for better snr ..one of the patents states this in similiar words.
Logged
Prospector_Al
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


Turkish Technology Rocks


« Reply #4 on: Saturday January 17 2015 05:56:27 AEDT AM »

  
  

There is a general perception that larger nuggets are (or should be) more easily detected (ie detected deeper).  
That is, the bigger the target, the easier it is, or should be, to detect at depth.

     - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
     - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
     - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

Allan says larger nuggets “have LONG TIME CONSTANTS” … OK, but what does that mean to a detectorist in selecting tools (eg detectors, coils), optimising settings or selecting ideal conditions for searching for them? …. from a prospectors, not designers, point of view.  

How can one maximise the detection or detection depth for large nuggets (1 oz + say)?  
Does one seek or avoid certain geology shallow or deep ground or soil type, always use largest coil, which detector settings? Generalities, not detail.

Perhaps Alluvium can do this from a successful (big nugget finder’s) point of view? If he were looking for a big nuggets (1+ oz) what tools would he want need to find them at depths over 30 cm?  

Huego  happy face


Any detector with a ground balance cct whether auto or manual is old hat ...its gonna ignore some nugg sizes at depth. The ground does not need to be balanced it needs to be ignored ... the wanna be's are trying to improve old methods ...the new tech like cc ferinstance ignores ground without balancing ccts. Time constants dont matter only signal to noise ratio.

Hi Paul,

Candy's Constant Current patent does not include the means to ignore the ground.  Even if it had been included, the Patent Office would have required a restriction, since the method isn't
specific to the CC circuit.  Without the means to ignore the ground and hot rocks, the modest
depth increase of the CC method does not outweigh the drawback of the icreased current
consumption

It's my guess that ????? has filed another patent that will fix the CC detector, and Minelab will have to hire him back..

My Crystal Ball also shows that the new "Flagship" release will be further delayed..

Clairvoyant Al

Logged

Süper Altin Dedektör: Exclusive rights for Australia and the U.S.A.
Prospector_Al
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


Turkish Technology Rocks


« Reply #5 on: Saturday January 17 2015 06:09:47 AEDT AM »

  

There is a general perception that larger nuggets are (or should be) more easily detected (ie detected deeper). 
That is, the bigger the target, the easier it is, or should be, to detect at depth.

     - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
     - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
     - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

Allan says larger nuggets “have LONG TIME CONSTANTS” … OK, but what does that mean to a detectorist in selecting tools (eg detectors, coils), optimising settings or selecting ideal conditions for searching for them? …. from a prospectors, not designers, point of view. 

How can one maximise the detection or detection depth for large nuggets (1 oz + say)? 
Does one seek or avoid certain geology shallow or deep ground or soil type, always use largest coil, which detector settings? Generalities, not detail.

Perhaps Alluvium can do this from a successful (big nugget finder’s) point of view? If he were looking for a big nuggets (1+ oz) what tools would he want need to find them at depths over 30 cm? 

Huego  happy face


Hi Huego,

In my opinion there's nothing a detectorist can do at this time to improve her chances of finding
large nuggets other than waiting for the Ship to come in.  For all we know, it may be sailing under a different Flag than expected.  All I know for sure is that ships are on the way..

Crystal Ball Al
Logged

Süper Altin Dedektör: Exclusive rights for Australia and the U.S.A.
moodz
restricted
Hero Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 813


« Reply #6 on: Saturday January 17 2015 11:41:19 AEDT AM »

  
  
  

There is a general perception that larger nuggets are (or should be) more easily detected (ie detected deeper).  
That is, the bigger the target, the easier it is, or should be, to detect at depth.

     - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
     - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
     - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

Allan says larger nuggets “have LONG TIME CONSTANTS” … OK, but what does that mean to a detectorist in selecting tools (eg detectors, coils), optimising settings or selecting ideal conditions for searching for them? …. from a prospectors, not designers, point of view.  

How can one maximise the detection or detection depth for large nuggets (1 oz + say)?  
Does one seek or avoid certain geology shallow or deep ground or soil type, always use largest coil, which detector settings? Generalities, not detail.

Perhaps Alluvium can do this from a successful (big nugget finder’s) point of view? If he were looking for a big nuggets (1+ oz) what tools would he want need to find them at depths over 30 cm?  

Huego  happy face


Any detector with a ground balance cct whether auto or manual is old hat ...its gonna ignore some nugg sizes at depth. The ground does not need to be balanced it needs to be ignored ... the wanna be's are trying to improve old methods ...the new tech like cc ferinstance ignores ground without balancing ccts. Time constants dont matter only signal to noise ratio.

Hi Paul,

?????'s Constant Current patent does not include the means to ignore the ground.  Even if it had been included, the Patent Office would have required a restriction, since the method isn't
specific to the CC circuit.  Without the means to ignore the ground and hot rocks, the modest
depth increase of the CC method does not outweigh the drawback of the icreased current
consumption

It's my guess that ????? has filed another patent that will fix the CC detector, and Minelab will have to hire him back..

My Crystal Ball also shows that the new "Flagship" release will be further delayed..

Clairvoyant Al



Hi Al ....

the relevant claim is this one ...

Apparatus comprising a metal detector having an energizing coil, a capacitor charged by a high voltage source and discharged into the energizing coil and for rapidly energizing the coil, a low voltage source connected to the coil for establishing and maintaining constant current in the energizing of the coil magnetic field in an adjacent substance that allows eddy current target objects to charge up according to their own time constant and sustaining the established constant current and having a receive coil detecting change of the magnetic field current target objects to charge up according to their own time constant and sustaining the established constant current and having a receive coil detecting change of the magnetic field during that time and amplitude during that time that characterizes the eddy current object while permeability mineralization is ignored.


This claim does not explain how it works though ....however there is a well known device in a certain industry that utilises this method as its primary money spinner ... and its not a metal detector.

You may find that a boarding party has been prepared for that ship and there will be great difficulty in offloading any stores in OZ.
Logged
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 16888



« Reply #7 on: Saturday January 17 2015 11:44:34 AEDT AM »

  
You may find that a boarding party has been prepared for that ship and there will be great difficulty in offloading any stores in OZ.

????
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”?
authere
invited members
Junior Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 348


« Reply #8 on: Saturday January 17 2015 11:53:43 AEDT AM »

Hi Moodz,

If the ship's sailing I wanna be on it, what's goin on/////

Is it time/// excited

Ron
Logged
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 16888



« Reply #9 on: Saturday January 17 2015 12:17:14 AEDT PM »

  
This claim does not explain how it works though ....however there is a well known device in a certain industry that utilises this method as its primary money spinner ... and its not a metal detector.
Moodz,what are you inferring by this statement?
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”?
moodz
restricted
Hero Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 813


« Reply #10 on: Saturday January 17 2015 13:10:32 AEDT PM »

...well the vested interests are not interested in any competition ... by boat or any other means 
Logged
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 16888



« Reply #11 on: Saturday January 17 2015 16:48:51 AEDT PM »

  
  

There is a general perception that larger nuggets are (or should be) more easily detected (ie detected deeper). 
That is, the bigger the target, the easier it is, or should be, to detect at depth.

     - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
     - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
     - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

Allan says larger nuggets “have LONG TIME CONSTANTS” … OK, but what does that mean to a detectorist in selecting tools (eg detectors, coils), optimising settings or selecting ideal conditions for searching for them? …. from a prospectors, not designers, point of view. 

How can one maximise the detection or detection depth for large nuggets (1 oz + say)? 
Does one seek or avoid certain geology shallow or deep ground or soil type, always use largest coil, which detector settings? Generalities, not detail.

Perhaps Alluvium can do this from a successful (big nugget finder’s) point of view? If he were looking for a big nuggets (1+ oz) what tools would he want need to find them at depths over 30 cm? 

Huego  happy face


Any detector with a ground balance cct whether auto or manual is old hat ...its gonna ignore some nugg sizes at depth. The ground does not need to be balanced it needs to be ignored ... the wanna be's are trying to improve old methods ...the new tech like cc ferinstance ignores ground without balancing ccts. Time constants dont matter only signal to noise ratio.

CC  Pi technology  may not" ignore the ground" if the ground is strongly conductive eg moist and salt  effected.
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”?
moodz
restricted
Hero Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 813


« Reply #12 on: Saturday January 17 2015 17:50:40 AEDT PM »

  
  
  

There is a general perception that larger nuggets are (or should be) more easily detected (ie detected deeper). 
That is, the bigger the target, the easier it is, or should be, to detect at depth.

     - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
     - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
     - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

Allan says larger nuggets “have LONG TIME CONSTANTS” … OK, but what does that mean to a detectorist in selecting tools (eg detectors, coils), optimising settings or selecting ideal conditions for searching for them? …. from a prospectors, not designers, point of view. 

How can one maximise the detection or detection depth for large nuggets (1 oz + say)? 
Does one seek or avoid certain geology shallow or deep ground or soil type, always use largest coil, which detector settings? Generalities, not detail.

Perhaps Alluvium can do this from a successful (big nugget finder’s) point of view? If he were looking for a big nuggets (1+ oz) what tools would he want need to find them at depths over 30 cm? 

Huego  happy face


Any detector with a ground balance cct whether auto or manual is old hat ...its gonna ignore some nugg sizes at depth. The ground does not need to be balanced it needs to be ignored ... the wanna be's are trying to improve old methods ...the new tech like cc ferinstance ignores ground without balancing ccts. Time constants dont matter only signal to noise ratio.

CC  Pi technology  may not" ignore the ground" if the ground is strongly conductive eg moist and salt  effected.
doug smile

Its all basic physics when di/dt =0 the coil is a short circuit. Conductivities of metals like gold ferinstance far exceed any clays or salt water. Targets are not homgenous like clay or water.
Logged
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #13 on: Saturday January 17 2015 21:11:16 AEDT PM »

  
Hi Al ....

the relevant claim is this one ...

Apparatus comprising a metal detector having an energizing coil, a capacitor charged by a high voltage source and discharged into the energizing coil and for rapidly energizing the coil, a low voltage source connected to the coil for establishing and maintaining constant current in the energizing of the coil magnetic field in an adjacent substance that allows eddy current target objects to charge up according to their own time constant and sustaining the established constant current and having a receive coil detecting change of the magnetic field current target objects to charge up according to their own time constant and sustaining the established constant current and having a receive coil detecting change of the magnetic field during that time and amplitude during that time that characterizes the eddy current object while permeability mineralization is ignored.


This claim does not explain how it works though ....however there is a well known device in a certain industry that utilises this method as its primary money spinner ... and its not a metal detector.

You may find that a boarding party has been prepared for that ship and there will be great difficulty in offloading any stores in OZ.


Hi moodz,

which patent are you referring to?

And what device are you refferring to too?

BTW, it is an interesting topic.
Cheers,
Aziz
Logged

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

Posts: 3977



« Reply #14 on: Saturday January 17 2015 21:48:06 AEDT PM »

Ok, I have found it.

It's the White's CC patent moodz was referring to.
  

^sif
Logged

Free science, knowledge and inventions to the mankind.
Alluvium
Newbie

Offline Offline

Posts: 74


« Reply #15 on: Sunday January 18 2015 12:45:43 AEDT PM »

Hi Huego & Al, Members.

Thank you both for resurrecting this subject, after all it is what really matters if you want to make some dollars out of this pastime, most have not seen the good old days of big nuggets, but it will happen again.

Huego, your questions below.

Quote:    1 - What factors, that we can control as prospectors, maximise detection depth?
             2 - Can it be explained in largely not technical terms to readers?
           3 - Are any new detectors (even prototypes) showing promise in achieving greater detection depths?

                                                                                                                                                                                

Questions # 1 + 2. There are a few factors within our control presently to achieve finding large nuggets at depth. I would say the main one is to have the best detector currently available for this purpose. Obviously in Australia a P.I. unit is going to give your best chance.                                                                                                                            

Knowing how to use it to the maximum advantage in this quest is next, this will only come with experience out in the field, and dedicated persistence in learning all of the foibles that come with it.

Then it is best to use the right size and shape Coil for the job in finding those deeper nuggets, this as you all know is by swinging a big loop of at least 18”inches, one can use coils much larger than this, but these have to be physically managed properly to do the work needed.

The most challenging one is by knowing most things about the finding of gold in nugget form, and where it might be found. The dedication in learning what’s required in this to put it mildly is huge. Sure a newcomer can go out on his or her first trip and find a large nugget, this has happened many times over many years.
 
But being realistic to consistently find larger gold it is best to study up over a long period. Learning how to prospect successfully is an art in itself.
===========================================================================

Question # 3. As always there are new detectors being designed to do a better job than the last model. Some are successful, but most others are just more bells and whistles, or a few different Timings to move the existing hole in detection to another position.

This allows a new class, type, shape or texture etc; of nuggets to be found that were missed before-hand. Realistically thinking outside the existing boundaries of restrictions posed by old methods is what is needed.
===============================================================================

Coils will make a big difference.


Having tested coils for manufactures through the years, I can tell you there is a big advancement to come yet, this will give your existing detectors new life, and speaking of depth on large nuggets this will happen.  The results I have seen in the last 2 years have amazed me, and to use these new style coils over hot soils in Normal timing, and staying quiet, yet actually punching deeper is another dream come true.

Yes there are detectors out there being tested and perfected, and they have been over some time. Unfortunately a certain large Company has put a dampener on this, as many manufactures have found out to their detriment over the years. If anyone looks like coming up with a better machine they are hit with threatening letters, law suites, you name it.

I have seen it first hand over many years, what most of you do not realise, is that these actions are what is holding back the detecting industry. I have been lucky enough to have tested and used some of these new style detectors and they do the job admirably, they are the new breed of advanced digital technology.

There have been exciting leaps in this tech that most of you have only dreamed of, but while one company has a strangle-hold over this matter, we all sit and wait. A select few will enjoy the spoils of this new tech, but as always the majority will miss out.  

That is sad, it’s Criminal Really!  

Cheers Alluvium.

Edited For Grammar correction. Alluvium.


Logged
Huego
invited members
Revered Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4094



« Reply #16 on: Monday January 19 2015 12:13:00 AEDT PM »

Thanks for your understandable and well considered response Alluvium. The lesson is, as always, learn to know your tools better, understand the local geology and gold history and that should maximise your chances ... until a new and major advance in technology is available which may double or treble our chances.

When I return to prospecting, maybe I should consider uprgrading my coils to larger lighter ones and continue to use to old 2200D? I have never pursued prospecting for $, its always been a hobby for me.  I have never found a "big one", and if I did I would probably never turn it into dollars, its just another collectable item for me.

".....but while one company has a strangle-hold over this matter, we all sit and wait. A select few will enjoy the spoils of this new tech, but as always the majority will miss out."  

Lets hope this situation wil change soon and justice will return to the goldfields.
Prospectors have a sense of JUSTICE, one forged in Eureka, one that is even greater their their loyalty to the designers of tools, makers or sellers.

Thanks to other members for their comments.

Huego  happy face
Logged

Views expressed are without prejudice, in the public/consumer interest & their "right to know". Huego reserves his right to: think freely & speculate, make & correct his mistakes, change his mind, expose fools & denigrators if/as required. Fighting greed & injustice with facts as he sees them.
Aziz
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3977



« Reply #17 on: Monday January 19 2015 22:29:25 AEDT PM »

Hi all.

Pity, that the technical aspects of detecting larger nuggets and how to overcome the issues haven't been really discussed.
I presume, that it won't be possible due to vested interest.

How can we overcome the vested interest and kill that evil greed to make some real progress together? I'll be willing to contribute to that interesting discussion.
excited
Cheers,
^sif
Logged

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

Posts: 567


« Reply #18 on: Tuesday January 20 2015 09:53:35 AEDT AM »

Huego’s thread here got me thinking after some in-ground tests that showed it could be easy to miss a response from a nugget, be it a large or a small one at its depth. While trying to locate a response in-ground I found it easy to miss on the first couple of swings until a couple more swings over the same spot which massaged the response just enough to verify. How often would you swing the coil 4 or more times over the exact same spot while out detecting on the goldfield unless you got a sniff of a response on your first couple of swings.

Btw it’s always good when Alluvium joints a discussion either by request or not and adds his wealth of knowledge from years of experience and success at detecting / prospecting. He shares that knowledge in an easy to understand way through his writings without being too technical. Actually I’ve had the good fortune to meet him and he is a true gentleman or as us Aussies would say, a top bloke.

Since this thread is about detecting large nuggets my friend and I travelled to Wedderburn on two occasions. Both trips were for 2 weeks of continuous detecting to find that elusive big one that we all hope and read about found by the old-timers. Using both of our 5000’s our two best pieces were a 14 gram at 13” my friend detected with an 11” mono and a 9.5 gram at 14” that I detected with a 25” mono. Boy compared to swinging my normal coil of choice an 18” then trying to swing a large 25” coil of that size it sure can be awkward as well to pinpoint along with having to dig a large diameter hole.

Also the nasty ground had its part to play with no thought of using any other timings on offer other than what this detector offered for this type of ground.

Another observation from these trips that caught my attention was the amount diggings and potholes dug by the old-timers. As you swing your coil near, around or over them I had that nagging feeling going by the depths some were dug down too, then I would have little hope of detecting a large nugget if one came from those depths, even with a large 25” coil attached to your detector of choice.

Now from where I come from nuggets found are tiny in comparison to the Golden Triangle's history of large nuggets.
Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
Alluvium
Newbie

Offline Offline

Posts: 74


« Reply #19 on: Tuesday January 20 2015 13:41:07 AEDT PM »

Hi Huego, Aziz & Gary.

Thanks for keeping this topic going boys, firstly Huego, I kept my comments simple without going into great detail, re; what are the actual best Detectors, Coils etc, that will do a much better job at finding larger nuggets at depth.                                                                                                                        

Plus explaining about the material and guidance necessary to learn the art of prospecting which is huge, not to mention the books, reports, photos and maps, CD’s with all info etc, that is needed to research the best places to have your greatest chance of finding the size of gold we seek.

Maybe at a later date, perhaps a series??                                                    

Your posted Quote: until a new and major advance in technology is available, which may double or treble our chances?

Huego these advances in tech are available now, but they are and have been suppressed, and will be until the time where someone bites the bullet and dares challenge Goliath. These are the bigger companies like Whites, First Texas, Garrett etc, they have the clout and $$ necessary for this.                              

Not those poor individuals working World-wide, trying to make ends meet on a shoe-string budget at home in their workshops. As you know I have been detecting since 1980, and have seen the various developments throughout those years, but I can tell you these haven’t traveled very far at all, re real new tech.

When you look at say the old green SD 2200, this detector with the right set-up, can still find big nuggets at depth, and just as well as the latest models, yet most likely deeper, and better.
Yes these latter detectors can find shallow tiny gold in extremely hot mineralised ground, but like I have always said, ---

“(It takes myriad number of small specks to make up for a 5 or 10 ounce nugget)”

Personally, I would stick with your 2200 Huego, with the right big coil it can find those deep nuggets, I can advise you about the coil to use.

Mate money helps pay the bills, fuel costs to name one, so we must look on detecting as not only just a hobby, but to at least pay our way until that big mother comes along.
===========================================================
 
Aziz.

Your. Quote: Pity, that the technical aspects of detecting larger nuggets and how to overcome the issues haven't been really discussed.
I presume that it won't be possible due to vested interest.

Yes I have not put any detail into this, on what we can do and use to find deep large nuggets. – As of yet.

I certainly cannot discuss the new tech I have seen and used in the field, but  maybe I can hint a little occasionally,  I can assure you there are exciting advancements and not far away either.

Aziz, you well know from your work over the years, that what we are using now is quite old technology, and continually this is as always, just old tech dressed up with Lipstick.                                                                                

I can tell you there are going to be a lot of disappointed people soon, that have been talking it up lately, anticipating big changes on this next detector to be released in late March.                                                                            

(It's just more Bells and Whistles I'm afraid) and so heavy too.
==================================================================

Gary.

Thank you for your kind comments, I will help anyone that has a question, just ask.

Your. Quote: How often would you swing the coil 4 or more times over the exact same spot while out detecting on the goldfield unless you got a sniff of a response on your first couple of swings.

In your post you referred to the chances on missing a small target response easily, this is quite true. As most operators know, you can’t ever get them all, but then again you can certainly maximize your chances with a bit of thought.

When looking for the big deep stuff, you should target specific ground, which means, being in an area that you know of where some deeper gold has already been found, either by yourself or another person etc.

This will give you a better chance of finding these sorts of nuggets that we all crave, so when detecting over your selected areas, you have to really knuckle down, slow right down, concentrate, overlap your swings, and listen very carefully, it won’t be a screaming signal. Use a grid pattern if you like; there are many ways to do this.

On the experiences you had detecting at Wedderburn, firstly with using the 18”in round mono coil as your standard weapon of choice, on this goldfield it gave your best chance of getting deeper missed nuggets, we all have to use the right tool for this quest.

Those operators that use small or tiny coils limit their chances immediately, meaning they have restricted themselves to detecting shallow ground and if they spend any time on the deeper areas, really they might as well be p!ssing into the wind.

Gary swinging a 25”in round mono is extremely hard work, especially combating the extra EMI that comes along with it, these and larger coils are not for prospecting, unless you have an arm like” Popeye”. They are to be used on known patches in deep soil areas, really it’s used as a clean-up coil.

With Pin-Pointing, we all need to have a small coil to do that task when you have a big hole opened out, either a small DD Joey coil on a stem, or a dedicated old Coiltek Hand-Grenade on a stick type, like I use. The nasty ground at Wedderburn and some other fields here in Victoria, do certainly pose a big problem with the detectors on offer today, this is where knowing your detector inside out is your only hope at times, either you dumb it down or go home.

Observing the old boys diggings shows an operator a wealth of knowledge, I advise to take some time before you start, (half an hour at least), have a walk up and down the sides of those gullies, see what the old boys were chasing and from where, those shallow side feeder runs on either side that you find joining the main run, have a detect in the deeper ground of to their sides, and on the lower end of these, they do hold some surprises.

Gary with having smaller gold where you reside, it is really a case of “When in Rome, -------------- “.

What else can you do?   That is unless you move interstate.

Cheers from Alluvium.

Edited for corrections Alluvium.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 Go Up Print 
australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Common interest forum.  |  General chat and discussion forum (Moderator: bugwhiskers)  |  Topic: Detecting Larger Nuggets « 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!