northwest Imitating Gold Nuggets
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Tuesday October 15 2019 12:01:44 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: 9,245  Total forum Posts:46,357 Members:856. 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.
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: Imitating Gold Nuggets 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Imitating Gold Nuggets  (Read 636 times)
Doug
Administrator
Revered Supreme Hero Member
*******
Offline Offline

Posts: 16854



« Reply #20 on: Sunday January 20 2019 10:17:58 AEDT AM »

  
Hi guys. Do you think this imitation of mine would do the job? 600 grams of Tin and Lead.


Based on conductivity Aluminum would be better to simulate long TC- large, solid very pure gold  nuggets.
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”?
GARY
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 558


« Reply #21 on: Sunday January 20 2019 16:30:00 AEDT PM »

Here is some info on my testing of a couple of my large test targets that I try to imitate as being a large nugget of gold.

The two pics below display a close-up of my largest test piece in hand and its dimension, its thickest section being at its centre 30mm.

From the many air test results (my addiction and a large folder full) that I have performed over the years with many different targets using different detectors and coils then the best result on this particular 40oz test target with a PI has been 41” with an 18” mono coil (my largest mono at that time) on an SD2200D.

As far as the later generation of Pulse Induction detectors in particular the GPX5000 then I have yet to air test this target however I would expect a similar result using the strongest Normal or Sharp timing although trying to detect in these timings is difficult over mineralised ground other than on benign or mild ground.

The SD2000D can have similar problems with a mono coil although using its AGB function does help as well as using a large DD coil.
Using a 20”DD (my largest DD back then) on the SD220D it achieved 36”.
 
Since then a GP3000 managed 41” as well using a borrowed 20” mono and 36” using a reverse phased 24” Eliptical DD.

I also use a test piece of aluminium, a rectangle block 100mm x 50mm x 10mm thick as displayed in a previous pic to try and imitate a large nugget as well.
 
Test results on this particular test piece using my current detectors, GPX5000 & QED, both with an 18” mono achieved 24” using settings to suit mineralised ground.

Have tested my largest coil a 25” mono on the 5000 it producing 25” in FG timing setting and 30” in Normal timing setting but have not tested with the QED.

Nor have I tested the 25” mono with either detector on the 40oz copper piece.

I am not trying to outdo each of the detectors as they both serve a purpose for my type of detecting.

Gary.  


* 40oz Pure Copper Piece (Small).jpg (140.73 KB, 498x480 - viewed 41 times.)

* 40oz dimension (Small).jpg (94.21 KB, 554x480 - viewed 40 times.)
Logged

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

Posts: 558


« Reply #22 on: Sunday January 20 2019 17:04:57 AEDT PM »

  

Hi guys. Do you think this imitation of mine would do the job? 600 grams of Tin and Lead.


Dontbstme that pic of your imitation test piece is interesting as well.

Gary.
Logged

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

Posts: 231


« Reply #23 on: Sunday January 20 2019 18:49:06 AEDT PM »

  
  

Hi guys. Do you think this imitation of mine would do the job? 600 grams of Tin and Lead.


Dontbstme that pic of your imitation test piece is interesting as well.

Gary.
Do you think my sculptured Tin-Lead is adequate representation of a gold nugget?

On the other hand I believe your pure copper slab may be too conductive. From my test experience PI does not get well around pure copper.
Logged
GARY
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 558


« Reply #24 on: Sunday January 20 2019 19:31:58 AEDT PM »

  

[Do you think my sculptured Tin-Lead is adequate representation of a gold nugget?

On the other hand I believe your pure copper slab may be too conductive. From my test experience PI does not get well around pure copper.


Yes my large copper piece,which actually was created from a splash of copper during a pour of molten copper at a mine's copper smelter, is more than likely too conductive.

In regards to your Tin-Lead representation of a gold nugget I remembered a thread I started on another forum many years ago which as I recall was named "Metals and Conductivity?" During that discussion a fellow experimented by creating nuggets using different alloys to try a replicate a gold nugget as close as possible. Therefore I checked back through some old doco folders of mine and found some of that discussion and the alloys he used so this is what he said:

Tested first compounds today using reality size nuggets of 2.4g and 1g and same sized castings of nuggets in Lead, alloy G, alloy Q, alloy M, alloy GM, alloy NY.

All target went into a mildly warm embankment at a depth of 8”
Using a 11”;C/T DD pro coil/3500/booster.
All targets were a clear signal.

LEAD signal was close but can be picked up by coil higher off the ground by 2” than gold.

ALLOY G
50%nickel
36%copper
14%tin (pure)
Good strong signal, a bit like gold but down noise was not really there as to gold also signal decay was longer.

ALLOY Q
Failed big, could have been a nail.

ALLOY M
65% nickel
30%copper
5%lead
Signal was broader than gold but very close.

ALLOY GM,
65%copper
15%zinc
15%lead
5%tin (pure)
Had a very hard time to separate signal from gold. I think this may be the one.
Good down noise and decay rate was spot on.

Unless anyone got some other compounds to suggest i think alloy M and alloy GM will get the full test regarding conductivity/ decay rate and a couple of others.



He went on further to say:

Lab techs have had a play with test targets on and over the last two weeks.
The alloy GOLD is the best we can come up with without turning lead into gold.

First testing was setting a bench mark for the tests, so we took a nugget and into the break press it went. Now it was the shape required to fit in all test equipment.

Conductivity, Using the same method as some of the above for mentioned scales which are the same as our techs. Test target came in at 10% using High conductivity copper at 100% not spot on but good.

Testing gold nugget using ultrasonics (timing of signal entering and return) and an impact hardness test, gold had a higher density and lower hardness to test target. Due to the test nugget alloy not being a true mix of metals, more a blend of small particles spread though out the parent metal, its make up structure is like gold. So the signal behaves in a similar way as did the sonic test.




Gary.
Logged

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

Posts: 231


« Reply #25 on: Sunday January 20 2019 21:27:42 AEDT PM »

  
  

[Do you think my sculptured Tin-Lead is adequate representation of a gold nugget?

On the other hand I believe your pure copper slab may be too conductive. From my test experience PI does not get well around pure copper.


Yes my large copper piece,which actually was created from a splash of copper during a pour of molten copper at a mine's copper smelter, is more than likely too conductive.

In regards to your Tin-Lead representation of a gold nugget I remembered a thread I started on another forum many years ago which as I recall was named "Metals and Conductivity?" During that discussion a fellow experimented by creating nuggets using different alloys to try a replicate a gold nugget as close as possible. Therefore I checked back through some old doco folders of mine and found some of that discussion and the alloys he used so this is what he said:

Tested first compounds today using reality size nuggets of 2.4g and 1g and same sized castings of nuggets in Lead, alloy G, alloy Q, alloy M, alloy GM, alloy NY.

All target went into a mildly warm embankment at a depth of 8”
Using a 11”;C/T DD pro coil/3500/booster.
All targets were a clear signal.

LEAD signal was close but can be picked up by coil higher off the ground by 2” than gold.

ALLOY G
50%nickel
36%copper
14%tin (pure)
Good strong signal, a bit like gold but down noise was not really there as to gold also signal decay was longer.

ALLOY Q
Failed big, could have been a nail.

ALLOY M
65% nickel
30%copper
5%lead
Signal was broader than gold but very close.

ALLOY GM,
65%copper
15%zinc
15%lead
5%tin (pure)
Had a very hard time to separate signal from gold. I think this may be the one.
Good down noise and decay rate was spot on.

Unless anyone got some other compounds to suggest i think alloy M and alloy GM will get the full test regarding conductivity/ decay rate and a couple of others.



He went on further to say:

Lab techs have had a play with test targets on and over the last two weeks.
The alloy GOLD is the best we can come up with without turning lead into gold.

First testing was setting a bench mark for the tests, so we took a nugget and into the break press it went. Now it was the shape required to fit in all test equipment.

Conductivity, Using the same method as some of the above for mentioned scales which are the same as our techs. Test target came in at 10% using High conductivity copper at 100% not spot on but good.

Testing gold nugget using ultrasonics (timing of signal entering and return) and an impact hardness test, gold had a higher density and lower hardness to test target. Due to the test nugget alloy not being a true mix of metals, more a blend of small particles spread though out the parent metal, its make up structure is like gold. So the signal behaves in a similar way as did the sonic test.




Gary.

All sounds great, BUT all gold nuggets are not quite the same, are they? So there will be no way to make the "real" thing with splats of metal. It's always going to be a look a like.
Logged
GARY
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 558


« Reply #26 on: Sunday January 20 2019 23:21:55 AEDT PM »

  

All sounds great, BUT all gold nuggets are not quite the same, are they? So there will be no way to make the "real" thing with splats of metal. It's always going to be a look a like.


Yep it sure seems like we are kidding ourselves.

Gary.
Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
Pages: 1 [2] Go Up Print 
australian electronic gold prospecting forum.com  |  Common interest forum.  |  General chat and discussion forum (Moderator: bugwhiskers)  |  Topic: Imitating Gold 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!
gold