New Minelab Detectors Coming

[EL NINO77]

If we place on the table some specific parameters of the new minelab detector, such as IQ multifrequency up to the limit of 100 khz, it will open another door .. to improve separation, unmasking and identification of targets ...

Physical limits, limits and rules for IB VLF We can't cross the detection ..., but we ask ourselves the question .... what percentage of this maximum has the manufacturers managed to use for the serial production of detectors ... in my opinion there are definitely some reserves - at least 10 to 15 percent. more ..while maintaining the current size of the 11 "coil ...

The range of the detector on strong Mineralization after optimizing the VLF detector and the coil I see an increase of another 20- maybe 25% .. compared to VLF peak detectors ..

   2D and 3D Separation will also increase when 100 khz is used, and will unmask some other targets that have so far been permanently disguised with thick iron .. that is a pure fact ...

 

To this we can add the fact why minelab did not produce a8- 9 "coil for Equinox ... in order to achieve a good 3D separation on a 9" coil, you must use a significantly higher frequency if at an 11 "coil.

[GB_Amateur]

20 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

But what about targets that are masked vertically?  Then there is not much one can do about that.  You can't necessarily see through an iron "wall" by improved signal processing.

 

I did a bit of thinking and playing around with MS-Excel.  Here's a simple view but I think much more realistic (though far from completely so) that is much better than the one I deleted.  Let's make the detector here a generic single frequency IB/VLF with concentric coil.

Consider two non-ferrous conductors (ferrous is a bigger problem but masking occurs for non-ferrous as well and is simpler in the sense that there is no ferro-magnetic contribution to the signals, thus easier to illustrate).  One conductor is of annular (i.e. 'ring') shape and is 2-3 inches deep.  The ring from a ring-and-beavertail pulltab is a real life example.  The second conductor is a disk shape, down about 6 inches (so 3-4 inches below the first conductor).  A clad dime is an example.  Assume they are in vertical alignment.

The upper conductor, being closer, will interact with the detector's transmitted EM field.  The magnetic component of that field will induce an eddy current (electrons moving in circular paths) in the near conductor and that current will subsequently produce an oscillating magnetic field which transmits back to the detector and is picked up by the receive coil and interpreted by the detector's circuitry (analog and digital) to give a discriminated signal.  The phase shift of this return signal's wave relative to the wave transmitted by the detector allows for discrimination (i.e. via target ID differences).

Although the near conductor distorts the detector's EM field it doesn't completely kill it.  The lower conductor will also interact with the field local to it, create an eddy current and subsequent magnetic field which also transmits back to the detector's receive coil.  For multiple reasons (distance from detector affecting things in multiple ways) that signal is much weaker.  BUT, because its of different composition, size, and shape its generated magnetic radiation will quite likely have a different phase shift than that of the near/upper target.  Here's a illustration comparing the signal seen when both conductors are present and the signal seen when only the near conductor is present:

First thing to realize is that when both targets are present there is still only one wave (sum of the two individuals waves) for the detector to interpret.  Note also that both sine waves cross the horizontal axis (signal strength 0 line) to the right of time = 0 meaning both are phase shifted with respect to the transmitted wave (not shown but whose axis crossing occors at time zero).  Note in particular around time of 3.5 (arbitrary units) that the two waves cross at different points -- different phase shifts.

What we see is that there is a different signal picked up (and interpreted as a different TID) when two conductors are present than if just one.  So does that mean we can tell the difference between the presence of one target and two?  Unfortunately in practical cases, no.  The reason is that the red curve could also have been produced by a different buried *single* conductor (likely of different size, shape, composition than the near conductor currently seen).

To make this example a little more realistic.  Suppose you swing over the ground (with both conductors present) and pick up the red signal, leading to a target ID of X.  You dig a 6 inch deep plug and find the deep conductor, remove it, and replace the plug.  Now you swing over the same location (note the upper conductor is back to its original location) and the detector picks up the blue signal giving off a different TID (value of Y) than previously.  Yes, in this way you've noticed the difference and thus a masking, but the original signal could have just as easily been a single conductor (different than the upper conductor and possibly at a different depth) with TID = X so in the first case you only knew there was a difference *after* you recovered the lower conductor.

Now, what happens when you have two or more simultaneous transmitted waves of different frequencies?  Can you now know before digging that you have two targets instead of one?  I don't know the answer to that one.  More study needed!

[Chase Goldman]

EL NINO who posted just before you did thinks there is still room for improvement in the scenario you mentioned by using a higher top -end frequency.  I guess we'll see.  Unfortunately, it looks like we won't see anything from Minelab along these lines until 2022.

[EL NINO77]

let's take this case quite a demanding case of iron camouflage ...
 you need 70 khz for such unmasking .... 30 khz has no effect here ..

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

at 30 khz you will go somewhere here ...

 

 

 

[Steve Herschbach]

Minelab GPX 6000 Revealed!

[Northeast]

On 4/6/2020 at 8:05 PM, Northeast said:

Lastly, the good old GPX 5000 will simply see a long overdue makeover.  No new tech but smaller box, lighter weight, incorporated batteries, addition of wireless options similar to the Equinox where proprietary or open market audio can be used.

So this was close.   Missed out the bit about new tech - seems like there is a good amount of new tech.  

 

On 4/6/2020 at 9:28 PM, Aureous said:

NE, At least 2 of those machines you quoted are 'on the money'... going by the whispers being generated for the past several months...

But which of the other 3 mentioned might have been 'on the money'?  🤔

[Ramius]

With Nokta Makro teasing their "soon" to be released multi-frequency detector, and with the thought it will go head-to-head with the Equinox,  it makes you wonder if one of these new 5 Minelab products is something that would compete with this release, or if Minelab feels the Equinox series already does enough.  Could each company be holding back, waiting to see what the other releases, before they release theirs?  A bit of a corporate game of Chicken? 

[GB_Amateur]

2 hours ago, Ramius said:

Could each company be holding back, waiting to see what the other releases, before they release theirs?  A bit of a corporate game of Chicken?

It seems there is an advantage to going first, not second.  I read this all the time -- some people think detector companies have new products ready for release but sit on them.  I'm no expert but that doesn't strike me as the way the competitive world works.  The graveyard of products is littered with those that were second to the finish line, and not infrequently they were even better products than the race 'winner'!  Snatch the consumer's money before they have a chance to burn it on your competitor's product.

A company like Minelab (and likely even smaller detector manufacturers) have ideas, breadboards, prototypes in the works and may have to shuffle their researchers from one to another as the need dictates.  (Carl Moreland mentioned this occurring when he was called to help develop and/or finish the Tekpoint/F-pulse handheld pinpointer at First Texas.)  So priorities can affect R&D flow.  But many of those ideas/projects never make it because of technical, etc. shortcomings that aren't solved, at least not as a marketable product.  When they see the light at the end of the tunnel -- in demand marketable product is doable -- I don't envision them waiting for the competition to catch up.

[schoolofhardNox]

4 hours ago, GB_Amateur said:

It seems there is an advantage to going first, not second.  I read this all the time -- some people think detector companies have new products ready for release but sit on them.  I'm no expert but that doesn't strike me as the way the competitive world works.  The graveyard of products is littered with those that were second to the finish line, and not infrequently they were even better products than the race 'winner'!  Snatch the consumer's money before they have a chance to burn it on your competitor's product.

A company like Minelab (and likely even smaller detector manufacturers) have ideas, breadboards, prototypes in the works and may have to shuffle their researchers from one to another as the need dictates.  (Carl Moreland mentioned this occurring when he was called to help develop and/or finish the Tekpoint/F-pulse handheld pinpointer at First Texas.)  So priorities can affect R&D flow.  But many of those ideas/projects never make it because of technical, etc. shortcomings that aren't solved, at least not as a marketable product.  When they see the light at the end of the tunnel -- in demand marketable product is doable -- I don't envision them waiting for the competition to catch up.

I agree. Going second can only work if you have the ability to quickly revamp and produce your newest machine after viewing what the competition just released. And we know that can't happen. Going next after the Equinox will not work if your machine doesn't compare to it. I would think you want to be first and get what sales you can get, before Minelab releases. It happened to me while I waited for White's to put out there newest machine, the E trac came out and White's hesitated, so I bought the E trac and never looked back.

[Guest Tnsharpshooter]

Don’t forget about Xp.  They may have a horse in race too.  You never know.