Jump to content

Nox Speed And Separation


sube

Recommended Posts

 

2 hours ago, Tometusns said:

Sube,

   I think we should get a bunch of different detectors and do the test. I'm thinking we may find it's just the nature of the beast. But I think I understand the question now and you were hoping one of the guys on here could explain why that happens. 

 I'm sorry I can't help with a real scientific explanation but I see what you're asking.

  Perhaps someone with more knowledge about the field will have some insight.

                                                 HH! Tom

Glad someone understands the question, because frankly I don't. I find it really hard to decipher the question because of the way its written, for some reason.

2 hours ago, sube said:

Jeff said So if your Nox coil is over a small iron target and say a small gold nugget, the nugget will get two or three shots at being detected while the iron target only gets one. Depending on what mode you are in if you have a dime and pull tab at roughly the same depth and orientation, the pull tab is more than like going to drown out the dime so to speak and blur the target response since they are roughly the same size and one is a low to mid conductor and the dime is a high conductor.  Just my two cents

Yes read your post thanks for the reply but the ? remains it does this fine to 5 inches and then becomes blind to the dimes .My untech mine is seeing no separation past 5 inches fact .I think it has to do with the coils field getting bigger and bigger as you move away from the target a ( physical thing can't be changed ) and maybe all detectors would act the same way .Maybe it's just not possible to change the out come at depth of course this is just my low tech observation . sube

 

 

 

Can you better explain your test setup because I am really having a hard time visualizing what you are actually doing.  Specifically, you keep referring to 5 inches ( "does this fine to 5 inches and then becomes blind to the dimes" - not exactly sure what that means) - do you mean you are simply raising the coil in air.  If so, then that is not a realistic test.  All you are demonstrating is how much resolution and depth you lose if you are not keeping the coil close to the ground.  The air has a completely different "conductive" (not really the correct term when talking magnetic fields) property vs. the dirt as far as concentrating the magnetic field plus the difference in "impedance" (also not the right term, but close enough) between the air and the dirt tends to distort some of the magnetic field.  This is not the same as testing over a 1-inch deep dime and pull tab vs. a 5-inch deep dime and pull tab.  Your results will be different.  So I am not sure at all we are working on understanding a realistic problem or effect here that really matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I actually already answered the question, it’s just not what people want to hear. It should be obvious machines don’t separate as well at depth as in the shallows. Nothing improves with depth. As far as machine differences, the details of why this is different than that are locked inside the proprietary and closely guarded processing programs. Why does the CTX do this at 6 inches and the Equinox do that? Only the engineers at Minelab can really answer that question, and they will not. All we can do is use the machines, observe what they actually do in the field in our ground and on our targets, then use whatever works best for us. Ask “why” all you want, you will never get a more honest and accurate answer than what I just gave. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve said actually already answered the question, it’s just not what people want to hear. It should be obvious machines don’t separate as well at depth as in the shallows. Nothing improves with depth.

This is what I wanted for a answer honest reply when I bought the detector I was thinking this was what I needed for hunting in trashy spots and the separation was what I needed but not at 2 to 5 inches won't do me any good .I still think as you go deeper say 10 inches the dimes have to be 6 inches away to get a ID that leads me to think the coils field is getting bigger thereby encircling both targets .

This is a 2d target situation which would be easier than a 3d situation .Tom D from another forum says the nox will shine in a 3d situation who am I to not believe him but if it does not pass a 2d situation then how can it pass a 3d situation .

Chase the test was done in the ground same thing happened did not matter air test or in the ground .Steve I want to thank you for your honest reply and all the other posters that contribute to this tread thank you all . sube

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sube ..... Equinox will work in this test on a single 1F frequency of 5khz ... ,, and you can lift the coil to a level of 5-6 "and possibly more inches if using a small 6" Equinox coil in the test.

Multifrequency programs   ...themselves will work well - right up to coil height 2-3 "above mixed targets... / Park1- up to 2"... / Park2 - up to 3 "/ ..

Recovery speed used in the test was 3..., but I tried to use lower and higher recovery sped .. recovery speed in this test does not significantly affect the results, in this test is almost one logic of detector evaluation for such a mixed signal ..

Setting Iron Bias/ in multifrekvency programs/... also has no decisive influence on the test result ... the only exception is setting Iron Bias to a maximum of -iron bias 9 ... where it begins to dampen the received mixed signal strongly..

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


I also compared Whites Spectra V3, and Tek. G2 ... on small coils ... Spectra V3...... in 3F multifrequency-/Best data../., it locks high conductors well even if the coil.. is very high above the mixed targets ,,,

Teknetic G2 is also good enough ...

   
All the detectors in the test were done with the correct Ground Balance ..
Testing was performed on 4 -bar Fe3O4 .... mineralization...

IMG_20200412_152552.jpg

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EL NINO77 said:

Sube ..... Equinox will work in this test on a single 1F frequency of 5khz ... ,, and you can lift the coil to a level of 5-6 "and possibly more inches if using a small 6" Equinox coil in the test.

Multifrequency programs   ...themselves will work well - right up to coil height 2-3 "above mixed targets... / Park1- up to 2"... / Park2 - up to 3 "/ ..


I also compared Whites Spectra V3, and Tek. G2 ... on small spools ... Spectra In 3F multifrequency, it locks high conductors well even if the spool is very high above the mixed targets ,,,

Teknetic G2 is also good enough ...

 

IMG_20200412_152552.jpg

 

 

Thanks for doing the tests it is true as you seen that 5 khs does separate to full coil height giving full power to high conductor and making it less sensitive to lower conductors (tab) but iron is a different problem running 5khs more falsing and not being able to adjust iron bias .

Tit for tat I could of just bought a straight vfl and achieve the same results .But I thought running muti  would do the same because it is running 5khs also learn as you go I guess . Most people would say the ctx is complicated to run it is just as complicated as the nox a lot of people dumped there ctx for the nox now there in the same boat they (actually have to learn the machine to get the most out of it ).

When the ctx came out people learned the controls and ran it like there other detectors sound was there biggest concern it's in the tones they say don't need to look at the fancy bells and whistles screen I go by sound this how far they advanced . Well I say it's like listening to a ball game on the radio as to watching it on tv so much more imfo  They never put the time in to understand what was going on the screen .This is half the advantage of using a top end detector screen and sound so much more imfo to make a choice .Now the nox well be learned in time just like the ctx and people well get better at it just takes time it's still new but we still need that baseline of what it can do and what it can't .

The test I did was to show muti has a problem with separation at depth something to remember when using it .It's good people do test gives a person a base line to make a more accurate choice when confronting different sites .

Do I like the nox yes I do just have to find where it fits in my detecting and sites will take time just like other detectors .I appreciate the time you took running the test thank you .sube

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sube ... if Equinox worked the same Ctx on mixed various conductive targets .... it would be quite possible that it achieved comparable separation results with Ctx ...

Here is more about detection logic ..

Ctx and Spectra are optimized for the "American style" of the cherry picker park program ... this means finding interesting and well-targeted targets among aluminum and other waste ...

Equinox is an excellent "Old world style" unmasker and is optimized ..... to detect any non-ferrous signal in the amount of iron waste ... while maintaining good identification even for non-ferrous things .... because small hammer coins start from the number 5 ID and more ..So here in Europe, for example, we dig up almost everything .... what the number 5 ID and more ...

Of course, "American style - New world ..." and "European style - Old world" of detection has of course its advantages and disadvantages ...

I think it is good to use both detection styles according to location, and detection conditions .. and it would be good if Equinox could exactly optimize for both detection styles ...

 

Old European style .. Some old coins have really pretty low ID ..

september 2018 iphone 5S 022_DxO-id.jpg

 


 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

EL nino 77 said Sube If  the equinox worked the same ctx on mixed various conductive targets....it would be quit possible that it achieved comparable separation results with the ctx .

El NINO 77 the ctx still suffers like the nox when the pull-tab is with the dimes same fate as nox can't separate I don't no if it's a muti thing fbs thing or what but even though ctx runs at a lower frequency than the nox the tab still is seen as the only target passed 5 inches .

Now when iron is used instead of tab the results change the ctx will be within 1 number of the true id of the high conductor The nox well see 14 to 16 maybe a 20 now and then. .

Nail and nickel nox smokes it solid 12 to depth ctx all over the place random numbers same as nox with dime and nail .Looks like we need both detectors or maybe they could put lower frequency for the nox in park 1 don't know. sube

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chase ... I've tried all Equinox multi programs as well as Beach 1 and Beach2 .. but it doesn't help if the coil is more than 2-3 "above the targets...

The only reliable option is a separate 1F frequency 5khz .. ,, .....5-6+"  coil .....above the targets..... but indeed 1F frequency 10-15-20-40 khz here also will not work ...

Among other things, I use 2 pieces x 23mm-5gram silver coins in this test to give a much more reliable high-conductivity signal than the US silver 10 cent / dime / coin.

This test is almost about the logic of calculating the ID of a mixed signal ..., Equinox hacks the low ID of the signal ...,

Spectra V3 and Teknetic G2, even though they have a smaller coil, have a major disadvantage in sensitivity to high conductors ... it gets stuck in a mixed signal on a high ID ....

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...