northwest QED Performance
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Tuesday December 10 2019 12:37:41 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:866. 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  |  QED users  |  QED users (Moderator: bugwhiskers)  |  Topic: QED Performance 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Go Down Print
Author Topic: QED Performance  (Read 825 times)
GARY
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 585


« Reply #20 on: Thursday November 28 2019 10:34:28 AEDT AM »

Okay for those who may be interested I could only detect the 39mm length of 0.8mm diameter 60/40 Rosin Core Solder once I twisted into a circle similar to the size of the one on far left in pic which ended up 10mm diameter.

Again in the backyard after GB’ing the detector as I had done for the test with the Aluminium foil and using the lowest THS-B possible at this location (4 positions below Null) THS-A 60, GAIN 1 and MODE 1 then a clear response on the circle of Solder at 100mm. Raising the GAIN to maximum and trying to hear through interference I believe I could hear a faint response at 150mm.

Couldn't be bothered to reduce the size of the the circle with the Solder.

Anyway just goes to show the difference.

Gary.
Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
WM6
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2013



« Reply #21 on: Friday November 29 2019 01:59:28 AEDT AM »

  
Okay for those who may be interested I could only detect the 39mm length of 0.8mm diameter 60/40 Rosin Core Solder once I twisted into a circle similar to the size of the one on far left in pic which ended up 10mm diameter.

Again in the backyard after GB’ing the detector as I had done for the test with the Aluminium foil and using the lowest THS-B possible at this location (4 positions below Null) THS-A 60, GAIN 1 and MODE 1 then a clear response on the circle of Solder at 100mm. Raising the GAIN to maximum and trying to hear through interference I believe I could hear a faint response at 150mm.

Couldn't be bothered to reduce the size of the the circle with the Solder.

Anyway just goes to show the difference.

Gary.


Interesting outcome, thanks.
Logged

Global capital is ruining your life?
You have right to self-defence!
egixe4
invited members
Newbie
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 186


« Reply #22 on: Saturday November 30 2019 10:54:55 AEDT AM »

Hi Gary,

The Hat story was a good one happy face
Thanks for posting those test results, It really goes to show how inadequate our detectors are in certain situations.
Interesting subject that’s for sure.

Mal
Logged
GARY
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 585


« Reply #23 on: Saturday November 30 2019 14:51:00 AEDT PM »

Thanks WM6 and thanks Mal.

Mal it took some time for us to realise his hat was causing the problem as he mostly detected with a 10” round mono instead of the 20” round mono.  

Good suggestion, as you say, to add a detectable metal to the alloy of the needle.

It is a wonder that a high kHz VLF such as a XP ORX for sensitivity to small targets that has high frequency 9.5” x 5” DD elliptical coil that can operate at 81kHz, to be capable of a response on the needle laying close to the surface?

Actually I had an opportunity to air test a XP ORX with its 9.5”x 5” elliptical high frequency DD coil on my tiny round 0.2g test nugget and the QED had no trouble matching it with the 8” commander coil. Not sure what frequency the ORX VLF was operating at although it was setup for tiny gold.

I would say the QED would be close to operating with one of the lowest pulse delay times of any PI currently on the market when set in MODE 1 which adds to its extra sensitivity in conjunction with a low THS-B setting as my two test results show.

Gary.  
Logged

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

Posts: 585


« Reply #24 on: Tuesday December 3 2019 16:12:16 AEDT PM »

Just to add some further test results with the QED and 8” mono this time using the 4 tiny Gold Nuggets displayed in the photo below resting on a ruler.

The top 2 Nuggets are of the same weight as the bottom 2 Nuggets except the top 2 Nuggets were found while gold panning and the bottom 2 Nuggets were detected and both are the tinniest Nuggets that I found so far with a detector.

After testing all 4 Nuggets with the QED(same settings) and Commander 8” mono I found the 0.05g Nugget (top left) was detected 2cm less than the 0.05g Nugget (bottom left) and the 0.1g Nugget (top right) was detected 4cm less than the 0.1g Nugget (bottom right).

Therefore it appears to show not all Gold Nuggets of the same weight react the same to a detector.

Gary.
 


* Tiny Gold Nuggets.jpg (46.93 KB, 612x422 - viewed 87 times.)
Logged

"The more you know, the more you know you don't know."
Goldman
Moderator
Junior Member
*
Online Online

Posts: 286



« Reply #25 on: Tuesday December 3 2019 16:23:28 AEDT PM »

  
Just to add some further test results with the QED and 8” mono this time using the 4 tiny Gold Nuggets displayed in the photo below resting on a ruler.

The top 2 Nuggets are of the same weight as the bottom 2 Nuggets except the top 2 Nuggets were found while gold panning and the bottom 2 Nuggets were detected and both are the tinniest Nuggets that I found so far with a detector.

After testing all 4 Nuggets with the QED(same settings) and Commander 8” mono I found the 0.05g Nugget (top left) was detected 2cm less than the 0.05g Nugget (bottom left) and the 0.1g Nugget (top right) was detected 4cm less than the 0.1g Nugget (bottom right).

Therefore it appears to show not all Gold Nuggets of the same weight react the same to a detector.

Gary.
 


Thanks Gary,
Great testing and does show that weight is not the total driver for detectability, rather profile to the coil.
Cheers Goldman
Logged
WM6
invited members
Supreme Hero Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 2013



« Reply #26 on: Tuesday December 3 2019 21:56:42 AEDT PM »

  

..... the 0.1g Nugget (top right) was detected 4cm less than the 0.1g Nugget (bottom right).


Gary.
 

It is expected.

Top right nugget has very uneven surface what mean that some induced eddy currents
can even annihilate each other due very different current proposition on nugget surface.

Nugget at bottom has very even surface and most eddy currents has this way the same
proposition which mean that their vectors can build stacked signals, longer detectable
than first one.

I have two testing sample of the same weight 1.1gram: golden nugget with very uneven
surface and round pendant (like a gold coin) with smooth surface. Gold pendant is usually
detected (depend on detector) 2 to 3 times deeper than gold nugget of the same weight.

Logged

Global capital is ruining your life?
You have right to self-defence!
GARY
invited members
Hero Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 585


« Reply #27 on: Wednesday December 4 2019 13:33:46 AEDT PM »

Well I am at it again testing the performance and sensitivity of the QED with my Commander 8” mono coil this time on a very fine link 9ct (375) 1.91 gram Gold chain as shown in my top pic below with my tiniest gold nugget (0.05g) that I have detected so far resting in the centre of the chain.

The next two pics display the weight of the Gold chain and Gold nugget on my scales.
 
Using the same settings as for my previous test on the 4 Gold nuggets the Gold chain was detectable when the chain was dragged across the coil and produced extra distance when the Gold chain was placed inside the small plastic sachet resting either way as displayed in both photos.

I then compared the detection distance to the 0.05 gram nugget and when the chain was resting clumped together in one corner of the sachet (as in Pic) it produced a similar response and distance to the 0.05 gram.

However once the chain was spread across the full width at the bottom of the sachet (as in the final pic) the result was clearly an extra 1 cm of detection distance. (pics now in my other posting below)

Of course I am comparing 9ct Gold chain to the Gold Nugget of around 22ct although the 9ct chain having only 37.5% pure Gold along with Silver, Copper Nickel etc and weighing 1.91 grams compared to a tiny 0.05 gram nugget I expected the Chain to produce more than an extra 1 cm.

Gary.


* 9ct Gold Chain and 0.05g Gold Nugget.jpg (319.55 KB, 1258x853 - viewed 54 times.)

* Gold Chain weight.jpg (89.52 KB, 1258x707 - viewed 51 times.)

* Gold Nugget .jpg (81.93 KB, 1258x707 - viewed 52 times.)
Logged

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

Posts: 585


« Reply #28 on: Wednesday December 4 2019 13:42:04 AEDT PM »

Damn my pics are rather large.

Gary.
Logged

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

Posts: 585


« Reply #29 on: Wednesday December 4 2019 14:13:50 AEDT PM »

Okay tried to reduce size of pics of the Gold chain inside the plastic sachet and ended up loosing both pics in my above post so have attached them again here.

As I said above once the chain was spread across the full width at the bottom of the sachet (as in the bottom pic) the result was clearly an extra 1 cm of detection distance.

Gary.


* Gold Chain in Sachet.jpg (89.1 KB, 1258x620 - viewed 47 times.)

* Gold Chain in Sachet .jpg (111.82 KB, 1258x623 - viewed 47 times.)
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  |  QED users  |  QED users (Moderator: bugwhiskers)  |  Topic: QED Performance « 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!