Jump to content

CTX 4040 Or Equinox 1000... Or Both?


Recommended Posts


25 minutes ago, midalake said:

I HAVE A PICTURE OF IT!!!!     AND YES, this was over our house a few months back!!!!

image.png.4a63e6b866aa5aed7baca5605ce90b96.png

 

Do they plan to sell a 6” coil for it?

😎

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can say is that if they come out with a next gen Equinox I'll be one of the first ones to pull the trigger on it.

My EQ800 has paid for itself at least ten fold, I can only imagine what a M-IQ2 machine would be capable of!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CTX going on 8 years old.....still the best detector I ever used to this day.....apparently others think the same ...... as the 8 year old CTX still has a insane resale value. 
Just wish the new 4040 is a little lighter and cheaper.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rob in (ca) said:

Just wish the new 4040 is a little lighter and cheaper.

...and faster.  Relatively slow recovery speed for such an otherwise advanced detector.  MultiIQ should help in this regard and with multiple Multi IQ frequency profiles (FBS2 only really has one profile with the modes being differentiated solely by by different user setting presets) should boost the CTX's fair to middling mid-conductor performance.  

Unless there is something inherently limiting regarding Multi IQ's ability to support Fe-Co target ID, target trace, and sophisticated 2-D discrimination profiles, it just seems like a no-brainer logical next step iteration from Equinox to the 4040 or whatever ML plans to call it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:"Unless there is something inherently limiting regarding Multi IQ's ability to support Fe-Co target ID ..."
There is. The simultaneous multi-freq technique used in the current Equinox models has no means of determining the 'FE' characteristic of a target.
But ... as the Equinox would appear to be able to generate any frequency waveform ( it's created by software ) it could be made to run a BBS/FBS-style signal, and hence have CTX-like performance. The limiting characteristics of the coil may affect what is possible. The Eqx seems capable of working at 5kHz and 40 kHz , FBS works at 3.125 kHz & 25 kHz, so maybe a tweaked FBS operating at slightly higher freqs would be viable. There's nothing magical about the FBS frequencies, the 1:8 ratio isn't 'golden' , it was chosen because it was easier to create in the early Sovereign-era electronics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, PimentoUK said:

The simultaneous multi-freq technique used in the current Equinox models has no means of determining the 'FE' characteristic of a target.

That is an amazingly definitive statement that you have casually thrown out there as fact that I am having trouble reconciling based on what little we do know about Multi IQ because of ML's lack of clear technical information on the subject and despite folks like you who have experimented with attempting to ascertain the Multi IQ waveform frequency components from lab equipment measurements.  Please cite the underlying references and technical explanations (the physics) that support this statement.  To my knowledge, ML has never stated this to be the case.  There has to be some inferred FE reference just to be able to 1) ID and discriminate out ferrous targets and 2) iron bias ferrous filtering/enhancement relies on multi IQ mode processing (not available in single frequency mode).  Did you guys discuss and deep dive this on Geotech's forum and come to this conclusion as you picked apart the Nox operating waveform frequency components, is there a ML reference, or is it, hopefully informed, but nevertheless speculation on your part?

Here is a link to Steve's Nox 800 lowdown page that includes excerpts from the multi part Treasure Talk articles attempting to tightrope between blurry technical explanations of Multi IQ, very high level comparisons to FBS, while attempting to prevent revealing too much about the secret sauce to the competition.

Unfortunately, ML's atrocious reorganization of their site in the intervening time since those articles were posted is making it near impossible to find and link to the original ML Multi IQ articles using the limited interface of my phone's browser.  All I can find is simplistic animated Multi IQ video (great for marketing) and that stupid diagram that conflates MULTI IQ and Single Frequency (V Flex) (great for totally confusing people).  Note to Minelab - you don't have to dumb the whole site down - you will still be able to successfully market your detectors to those who do and don't care about the details of the underlying technology.  If you re going to call the section of your site "Knowledge Base" please preserve the knowledge. Duh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has been discussed on Geotech1 and Dankowski's forum. I'll try and pull together a few links that are relevant. There's also a technical paper on ML's website explaining some of FBS operation.

The summary is:
FBS transmits its two frequencies CONSECUTIVELY. It produces 8 cycles of 25 kHz, followed by 1 cycle of 3.125 kHz, then repeat. The key point is that during the 3.125 kHz transmission, there is no other signal present, so there is just a square-edged waveform with a 160 microsecs gap between two consecutive transitions. This is used as a crude PI signal, which allows the detector to analyse a target differently to how a continuous sine-wave machine would see things. By combining the analysis of 'crude PI' and the 'continuous waveform' (that goes back to BBS machines like the Sov) it's possible to create a 'FE' figure, in addition to the more conventional 'CO / conductivity' one.

Multi-IQ does transmit all three of its signals SIMULTANEOUSLY , in a complex square-edged waveform that clearly has a lot of 39 kHz, in addition to the 7.8kHz & 18.2 kHz signals. So there is never a point where there's a big long gap between waveform transitions - about 20 microsecs is as big as it gets. So this 'crude PI' method can't be applied.

So to produce FE/CO figures, the Equinox would have to generate something close to a BBS/FBS signal. Long gaps between signal transitions are needed at some point.

Possible solutions would include a user choice of Multi-IQ or FBS operating modes. Or perhaps a mashed-together mode, such as one cycle of 5kHz followed by a burst of Multi-IQ waveform for 200 microsecs then repeat. The first of these is simpler, as nothing 'new' needs to be engineered, the existing know-how just needs transferring to the Eqx platform.

Here's the Minelab Technical article that mentions the 'FE' - determining technique:
ML article

There are a couple of other simple 'how detectors work' articles on ML's site that are perhaps too basic, but might be interesting to some:
www.minelab.com/usa/support/knowledge-base/articles

Here's a couple of Eqx threads on Geotech1 which show the waveform:
Geotech EQX Freq

Geotech EQX general

This FBS thread on Dankowski's Forum unfortunately does contain a lot of poor info as well as good info, and the waveform screengrabs that Yeasty posted up have now 'gone' , so it's not so good now.
Dankowski FBS geekery

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many thanks, PimentoUK excellent summary and links - I will dive in.  So in a nutshell you are saying the delay in the CONSECUTIVE transmission  of the FBS frequencies enables a time domain (signal decay) assessment of the low frequency component (pseudo pulse induction principle) of the multi frequency waveform to infer the FE component.  Equinox has no intervening delay as all two or three combined waveforms are transmitted simultaneously.  Interesting.  I wonder if this built in transmit and processing delay (combined with the older processor) is what gives the CTX poorer recovery speed performance.  I wonder if this can be overcome simply by applying additional processing horsepower.  Hopefully, ML engineers have been spending the last 3 years attempting to solve that problem to give the best of both FBS and Multi IQ worlds.  I would gladly pay the asking price for that product.  That would definitely be a worthwhile incremental improvement in Multi Frequency technology and VLF IB  detectors. Good stuff! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a nutshell ... it sounds like you've understood it.

As I've never used BBS/FBS machines, I never took the time to understand the details, so I can't explain FE/CO properly, but that Knowledge Base pdf seems to cover it, though I'll add another ML article to that post, just fer info.

  • Like 2
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...