Jump to content

Whites Had A Hybrid Detector?


Recommended Posts

Found this patent that Whites filed and got a patent on in 2014 on a hybrid IB/PI machine.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20110316541A1/en

Curious if anyone heard anything about this. Maybe Garrett will take it on?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


My thought on that is the discrimination side of the unit would only be as good as how deep the IB can go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have been swinging hybrids since Minelab combined frequency domain with time domain processing to create BBS multifrequency. Then FBS, now Multi-IQ. And Tarsacci MDT, another machine combining time domain and frequency domain processing. To a certain degree it’s all semantics and definitions more than reality. Marketing muddles things further, and more these days I just pay attention to what they do, and not which squirrel is running the treadmill inside.

Whites had working prototypes of this tech, but like most things it gets to this point where “if we can fix this one little but significant problem” but when you fix that, it breaks this, and engineer whack a mole ensues. That’s probably where this is at, as they never could get it to market. Hopefully Garrett can make something of it, as it’s one of whites Crown Jewels they were holding. There is no doubt in my mind that the future belongs to sophisticated mixed processing machines, with single frequency now the realm of the rebox and relabel crowd.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been never ending talk, for years, about supposed machines that will have the best of pulse-world , while at the same time, TID/Disc. ability like standard coin-machines.    So that you can effortlessly go into jet-black wet-salt sand, getting fabled depth, ... AND be able to pass nails and bobby pins *all at the same time*.   Who can argue with that, eh ?  It's no secret that some beach pulse machines can get a dime to a foot deep, so it's merely a matter of adding the ability to disc. out iron, and presto, you have the perfect machine.  Right ?

 

But alas, any efforts to do this is always as kac says:   Any such disc. (ability to pass nails, or discern TID's) is only good for the top half of the depth (down to 4 or 5" tops ?).  Beyond that, everything sounds the same.  So if you want the fabled depth, you kiss discrimination goodbye.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2021 at 3:18 PM, kac said:

Found this patent that Whites filed and got a patent on in 2014 on a hybrid IB/PI machine.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20110316541A1/en

Curious if anyone heard anything about this. Maybe Garrett will take it on?

This was something I worked on at White's, here is a patent I filed on a more practical version of the technology:

https://patents.google.com/patent/US9285496B1

I had it fully built and working with manual ground balance. It was deeper & quieter than a TDI. I was working on autotrack and discrimination and had both crudely functioning, and that's when I left White's. I saw no big technical hurdles left to overcome. Over the years I stayed in touch with people at White's but no one (to my knowledge) ever tried to pick up where I left off. Don't know why. I'd love to finish it but I don't own the patent.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Geotech said:

Over the years I stayed in touch with people at White's but no one (to my knowledge) ever tried to pick up where I left off. Don't know why.

That would be crazy.... and that would be in line with why White’s is no more. Thanks for the tidbits Carl. Hopefully Garrett has a better idea of what to do with White’s tech than White’s themselves did.

Carl may remember a conversation he and I had years ago. Carl and company were instrumental in bringing the V3i to market. I made a pitch to Carl that while V3i was revolutionary, it missed the mark in one way. My thought was V3i, but stripped into the lightest detector possible, with only the controls actually required for day to day operation. The absolute fact is Whites had an Equinox type design way before Minelab, but stood pat on big box instead of going to the next very obvious step of miniaturizing it. Obvious to me at least, and others listened when White’s did not. And it took Nokta/Makro to make my high frequency MXT. At least the waterproof TDI finally made it Carl, but too little, too late.

They were so close though it seems to pulling off a turnaround. The 24K and TDI Beachhunter were both moves in the right direction, and 24K, the last real machine from Whites, is best of class. Maybe without the pandemic, but that was the final blow. It’s too bad, because Whites really was advancing the tech in serious ways more than the other U.S. manufacturers. V3i is a box full of stunning first ideas, none of which reached full fruition at White’s. Seems to be the way of American manufacturers with second generation owners though. Something gets lost in translation from founder, to next in line.

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Geotech said:

I had it fully built and working with manual ground balance. It was deeper & quieter than a TDI. I was working on autotrack and discrimination and had both crudely functioning, and that's when I left White's. I saw no big technical hurdles left to overcome. Over the years I stayed in touch with people at White's but no one (to my knowledge) ever tried to pick up where I left off. Don't know why. I'd love to finish it but I don't own the patent.

You may want to contact Garrett, maybe you can finish it off. Wouldn't hurt to talk to them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, kac said:

You may want to contact Garrett, maybe you can finish it off. Wouldn't hurt to talk to them.

Something tells me Garrett is aware. :smile:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

   From Geotechs link, I also noticed Carl W. Morland, and John L. Earle, but not on this chart individually! In any case, amazing stuff!!👍👍

20210409_150921.jpg

  • 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
  • Similar Content

    • By diggindaboot
      THIS !! All the people boo hooing will be in line to get one at that price point. It will also force the hand of ML with their price structure. ML raised their price on the 800 and NM absolutely crushed that price point. The Legend doesn't have to be better, just equal to turn the fortunes in their favor. ML and their arrogant "obsolete" charge is foolish. Obsolete by definition means no longer produced or used. Many detectorist and their single frequency machines are still out there making great finds and having fun. Furthermore, single frequency detectors are still being made and sold. NM build quality is far and away superior to the Nox detectors. 
       
       
    • By Gerry in Idaho
      I thought I was pretty damn good, but this technology has me beat.
      https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/mining-gap-companies-push-find-raw-materials-electric-vehicle-boom-rcna5077
      Might be time to invest?
    • By mcjtom
      Metal detectors often seem to have a 'Depth Gauge'.  How is it calculated? Is it the strength (or inverse of it) of the amplitude of the return signal?  So, for instance, everything else being equal, the 'deep' target would mean either a stronger target at greater depth or a weaker shallow target?
    • By GB_Amateur
      While we're all abuzz with the announcement and advertised feature and performance characteristics of the XP Deus II, I'm wondering about tests that distinguish between detectors' target separation abilities.  'Word on the street' is that in trashy iron sites, the original Deus is still the best available.  Presumably those reports are based upon in-field testing, which of course is the real proof.  But the downside is, (AFAIK) these are qualitative observations, not quantitative.  Subjectivity involved?  Unfortunately, yes.
      We do have Monte's Nail Board Test for a special case -- iron nails near a single coin, all in the same plane and typically all on the surface of the ground.  Add depth combined with some mineralization (burying the MNB) and you've included another real world dimension.  But in the field, multiple nearby targets are seldom in the same plane.
      So you hopefully see the purpose of this post.  Has anyone seen/tried other methods to better simulate actual in-field conditions to differentiate between competing detectors to best be able to handle trashy sites?
    • By Rick N. MI
      I mostly hunt in lakes and the bottoms are mostly all sand. A test on a sandy beach with the Equinox 800 and Xp Orx, both hit hard on a 14k 3.7 gram gold ring buried at 14". For mild ground I don't see a need for multi frequency. I do like the multiple frequencies on the Orx.
      Is there an advantage to multi frequency in mild ground?
×
×
  • Create New...