Jump to content

New Minelab Detectors Coming

Recommended Posts

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Apologies if this has been posted before.

Where did it say five new detectors or machines? I only read five new products. Maybe a pin pointer, backpack, hat. vest, and dog whistle? I doubt we'll see five new "machines" by end of next year fro

Nope, you are the one breaking this news, and news it is! The good news - five key products!! The bad news - 2021  Though it does say fiscal year, which for Codan is July - June the following year, so

Posted Images

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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 ...





  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

    • By Goldseeker5000
      Just letting everyone overseas in Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania,Canada and everywhere else outside of the states know that I got the shipping rates corrected  for The Nugget Shooter's Field Guide, and reduced. Even the rates for ordering in quantity is way less.
    • By VicR
      Minelab has just applied for an Australian Design Patent for a "Tray".
      Anyone have any ideas what this would be?
    • By BGRIVER
      Sorry for the cross post in meet and greet.
      New to the forum, just wanted to say hello before I started to ask questions here haha. Several years ago I bought a junker metal detector to test out the hobby, it died a couple years later now I'm back.
      Wondering how good Kellyco customer service is. Ordered a new MD from them and after 10 days of patiently waiting, I was sent what Is obviously a used machine. I paid for a new one so I'm a bit irritated about it. It's Sunday so I have to wait until tomorrow to call. I could have ordered one through Amazon, but thought I'd give them a try. Any issues with Kellyco before? Not looking to bad mouth anyone, just wondering if this is common business practice. They have been around a long time I see, so I guess I expected more from them.
    • By Mark Gillespie
      Got word recently, that both Tim Mallory and Mike Scott have lost their jobs at 1st Texas.  I think it was, maybe 2 years ago when Gene Scullion and others lost their jobs too.  That makes me wonder about Lupe, who is one of the workers at the main plant.
      I guess Covid has affected more than just a few businesses. 
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Now that White’s has closed the factory in Sweet Home, these are the officially designated places to have warranty work and service done:
      Centreville Electronics (East Coast)
      9437 Main Street
      Manassas, VA 20110
      (888) 645-0202
      (703) 367-7999
      Fax: (703) 367-0868
      Centreville Electronics Northwest (West Coast)
      1550 Maple Pl.
      Lebanon Oregon 97355
      Ed Sebulski
      21920 44A Avenue
      Langley, British Columbia,
      Canada V3A 9J3
      Use this Service Center for Older Water Detectors
      Specializing in repairing legacy White’s water detectors. Please call for other repairs.
      Warren’s Repair Center
      Freeport, Florida
      (850) 835-3344
      At last report the White’s facility in Scotland closed in November and is no longer accepting items for service:
      White’s Electronics (UK) Ltd
      35J Harbour Road
      IV1 1UA
      Email: info@whites.co.uk
      UK Customers: 01463 223 456
      International Customers: +44 1463 223 456
    • By Steve Herschbach
      An intrepid forum member passed this along. Interesting, as the name does not sound “recreational” to me, more like something for geologists or exploration companies?
      November 29, 2020 note: We know now this is related to the new GPX 6000 introduction.

  • Create New...