Jump to content

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 post
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 post
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 post
Share on other sites

correct, yet single frequency is where it all starts and eventually ends with mixed processing detectors. the one frequency will always be part of the equation, without that base line there would not be progress. it takes several and different single frequencies to experiment and evolve. i prefer true multi frequency yet it will be the one frequency that in a way will tune the detector for maxmium performance

Link to post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 post
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 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 WhiteRabbit
      Hello, now here’s an opener that might just get me banned on my first post!
      Bear with me, my intentions are pure :)
      Does anyone know if it would be possible to jam an MD signal? The reason I ask is to combat the evident problem we have in the UK with “nighthawks”, illegal detectorists.
      Over here, any landowner can grant permission for detecting on their land (with caveats, known historic sites are protected by law). What often happens is that such a permission is granted and a detectorist innocently sets about his / her business. Someone less scrupulous spots this person and assumes there may be something important there, so shows up at night with a couple of friends and the landowner awakens to a field / lawn full of holes, then bans metal detecting.
      Historic sites are also looted.
      Just an off the wall question, how tricky would it be to build a device to block this on a piece of land? Anyone any ideas?
    • By ColonelDan
      99% of my detecting is done on central Florida beaches. Since it’s impossible to establish a well stocked test garden at a public beach, I sorta brought the beach home with me and developed my own private beach garden!
       
      I cut slots in two large empty chlorine tablet buckets at various depths as shown from 2 -16 inches. I then filled one with New Smyrna Beach sand and the other with soil...for the few times I land hunt around here.

       
      I embedded numerous examples of ferrous and non ferrous targets into paint stirring sticks. I also have several blank sticks I use for gold and silver jewelry as well as artifacts that I don’t want permanently attached to a stick.

       
      I then insert the target(s) in the slots, each at its desired depth, and start scanning.
       

      This allows me to rapidly change the targets, depth and relative position of each.  I can now test for sensitivity at depth as well as separation of ferrous and non-ferrous targets in a variety of scenarios using actual beach sand where I do my detecting.
       
      If I want to test in wet salt sand, I just soak the bucket sand with authentic sea water that I also brought home from New Smyrna Beach...and the Atlantic Ocean never even missed it.  😉
       
      Works for me.....
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I always have my ears perked up for something new in metal detectors and metal detecting technology. I’m not educated enough to really get deep into the technical side of it, but I have a general layman's knowledge of the subject.

      A couple years ago Carl Moreland, the Engineering Manager for White's Electronics, was interviewed on a radio show. I tripped over a reference to the interview on another forum and checked it out. It is very long, and near the end Carl dropped a bombshell. At least I thought so, but it went unnoticed and uncommented on in the metal detecting online world. I thought about posting it on a forum back then but decided to wait and see what developed. Here is the applicable portion of the interview:

      Relic Roundup Radio Show, January 17, 2012, Interview with Carl Moreland, Engineering Manager, White’s Electronics
      http://en.1000mikes.com/app/archiveEntry.xhtml?archiveEntryId=260469

      Transcript beginning at 50:57 mark:

      Carl Moreland - “I can mention one technology that we’re working on because the patent has already been published… or the application, not the patent hasn't gone through yet. We’re working on something called half sine technology, which has actually been around since the 1960’s in geophysical prospecting applications. This is where instead of transmitting a sinusoidal signal you actually just transmit half of the sine and you can do that at extremely high voltages and high ? rates and so on. It’s technically not pulse induction but it’s not VLF either and it is a time domain method. And with that we can get really good depth and we can even get target id information and do discrimination and so forth.”

      Can you see why I perked up at that? I am still amazed it did not get any notice at the time. Nothing happened for a long time. Then I got this PM from Rick Kempf recently:

      Sent 29 January 2014 - 09:04 AM

      Was looking for info on my new SD 2100 this AM when I sort of fell down a rabbit hole of old forum posts and emerged reading Whites new patent. About the first thing I noticed was that you were cited in "prior art".

      Here's what they cited: http://www.voy.com/76600/7/475.html

      The patent is here: http://www.google.com/patents/US20110316541

      Is this something you knew about? Just wondering.

      Rick Kempf

      I told Rick, yeah, heard about that. It was the patent finally being granted from the application Carl mentions in the interview. It was fun getting a mention in a patent though I think it was just the examiner studying up on the subject and finding my old post helpful in simplifying the subject.

      For a long time the Holy Grail in metal detecting has been something that combines the target identification of an Induction Balance (IB or more commonly known as VLF) detector with depth of a Pulse Induction (PI) detector. There have been many promises and false starts over the years, and that was one reason I kept the radio interview mention quiet the last couple years. Frankly, I had half forgot about it until Rick brought the patent being granted to my attention. Notice the title:

      Hybrid Induction Balance/Pulse Induction Metal Detector

      A new hybrid metal detector combines induction balance and pulse induction technologies. Target signals are generated from a transmitted wave that has both induction balance and pulse current inducing characteristics and uses pertinent sampling of the receive data. Combining the two data sources provides eddy current target identification while excluding ground permeability and remanence obscuration.

      Is it time to sing Hallelujah? Well, there is a big gap in between getting a patent and bringing a detector to market. Many patents get filed and you never even see something directly related to the patent. Maybe it looked good on paper but does not pan out well in reality for numerous reasons. So just because White's was granted this patent does not mean something is around the corner. However, they have been working on it for over two years already obviously. And it has been some time since White's put something new out. I do not count remakes of the MXT etc as new. So I think there is reason to be hopeful we may see something one of these days.

      John Earle is one of the unsung heros in the industry. He had a hand in many of the best products at Compass Electronics before moving over to White's after Compass went under. To this day I have never used a VLF that goes any deeper than my old Compass Gold Scanner Pro. John was one of the brains involved in that, as well as the White's Goldmaster 3, regarded by many as being the pinnacle of the analog development of that model line. I was fortunate to have met John at the factory some years ago. He is listed as the inventor on the new patent. Half sine technology is also mentioned in an earlier patent filed by White's, again with John listed as inventor at http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7649356.pdf

      Looks like serious stuff brewing. Bruce Candy of Minelab makes mention of half sine technology in a patent application at http://patents.com/us-20130154649.html which makes me wonder about the new "Super Gold Detector" he is working on. But it is this most recent patent by White's that seems to put the finest point on it. Maybe the Holy Grail of detecting is soon to be a reality. The fact it is White's certainly gives me more hope than what we have seen in the past.
      Edit May 2015 - see also White's patent for Constant Current Metal Detector
    • By NV-OR-ID-CAL-AU
      I know we have had some great advancements in VLF metal detector's over the recent past, but I am hoping that we can keep some of the older design features that seemed to work well. 
      My favorite new technological features being offered in VLF's are Multi-IQ and single frequencies options, fully programmable settings, waterproof, noise cancel, USB chargers, li-ion batteries, Bluetooth headphones, prospecting & coin/relic options, and lightweight. Really a great job by the inventors of these detectors.
      IMHO I hope we do not lose some of the past designs that worked well, such as the ergonomics of the balanced s rod that would separate in three places for backpacking, the hip mountable brain box, the detectors that would not fall over when put on a little bit of an uneven surface, the 6.5 inch elliptical concentric or double DD coils for great access in rocky areas, the 1/4 inch headphone jack, the spare interchangeable battery pack that takes regular batteries to serve as a back-up for the li-ion battery pack, and higher frequencies options.
      I would like to see what else had worked well with other detector user, seems like we are always buying aftermarket parts to retain some of these older features where possible. 
    • By schoolofhardNox
      Not sure where this belongs on the forum, (or if it even belongs here), but this seemed to be the best category to discuss this. Ever since information on the GPX 6000 started to trickle out, I had this nagging feeling something in detecting has changed for those of us who like the thrill of getting to know a new detector. I never would have envisioned the GPX line morphing into a simplified detector. After having the GPX 5000 for a bunch of years now, and using it for relic and beach hunting, I could not imagine relying on a machine that adjust everything for you. I get it that money talks, and when you are a publicly traded company, you go for profit first, and then deny it 😄 And now that there market has switched to an area that probably has very little experience with detectors, the GPX 5000 must have been daunting for them.  So they cater to that market. But I was hoping that a new GPX would fix some of the issues that the 5000 had. I was naive. Minelab has never kept the good parts of their previous machines and just added the the things that needed improvements. On the E trac, the best part of it was the depth it had in finding deep silver,  in long tones, multi. Also the bouncy numbers helped ID deep Indians. When the CTX came out, it lost some of that fluety tone and they tried to straighten out the numbers to a number 12 line. So a two dimensional screen that worked well was transformed into a 2 dimensional screen that bunched most targets on one line. The The EQ comes out and squashes out the numbers even further. So why I thought the 6000 would not do the same is beyond me. I guess I'm disappointing that the "trend" is to make machines where the manufacturer decides on how your machine is going to be set. I hope someone in my area gets a 6000 and is willing to bring it to the beach to compare settings on deep silver. If it wins, then I will eat my words. I know I will get some slack with people saying it's a gold machine, not a relic or beach machine, but to them I would say.... you should be worried when a company controls your ability to fine tune your machine. Thoughts?
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I'm looking for a Compass metal detector catalog that includes the Compass Gold Scanner, and Compass Gold Scanner Pro models. The full line catalog, and this would be about 1990-1992 or thereabouts. I'm adding a few key older metal detector catalogs to the Downloads Area to provide basic info on older models. I do not need a ton of catalogs, just key years where major model changes occur, as things moved slower back then.
      If the catalog was in pdf format that even better, but Googling only turns up a couple older catalogs, nothing I can find covering the Gold Scanner era. I am more than happy to pay for a print version if need be, so I can scan into pdf and put up for people to download.
      Thanks in advance for any help. 
      Me and my Compass Gold Scanner, back around 1990:

×
×
  • Create New...