Jump to content

Selectable Frequency And Multiple Frequency


Recommended Posts


OK, here is that full but probably incomplete list:

 

Selectable Frequency

1989 Minelab Eureka Ace Dual            8    19.5 kHz

1993 Minelab XT 17000                6.4    32 kHz

1994 Compass X-200                6    14 khz

1997 Minelab XT 18000            6.4    20    60 kHz

1999 Minelab Golden Hawk        6.4    20    60 kHz

2002 Minelab Eureka Gold        6.4    20    60 kHz

2005 Minelab X-TERRA 50                7.5    18.75 kHz

2006 Minelab X-TERRA 70            3    7.5    18.75 kHz

2009 Minelab X-TERRA 305            7.5    18.75 kHz

2009 Minelab X-TERRA 505        3    7.5    18.75 kHz

2009 Minelab X-TERRA 705        3    7.5    18.75 kHz

2009 XP DEUS            4    8    12    18 kHz

2016 Rutus Alter 71        Variable 4 - 18 kHz

2017 Nokta Impact            5    14    20 kHz

 

Multi Frequency

1991 Fisher CZ-6            5 & 15 kHz

1991 Minelab Sovereign            BBS

1992 Fisher CZ-5            5 & 15 kHz

1993 Minelab Excalibur            BBS

1994 Minelab Sovereign XS        BBS

1995 Fisher CZ-20            5 & 15 kHz

1996 Fisher CZ-7            5 & 15 kHz

1998 Minelab Sovereign XS2/XS2 Pro    BBS

1998 Minelab Excalibur 800/1000        BBS

1998 Fisher CZ-7a/7a Pro        5 & 15 kHz

1999 Minelab Explorer S/XS        FBS

2000 Minelab Sovereign XS2a Pro        BBS

2001 White's Beach Hunter ID        3 & 15 kHz

2001 Fisher CZ-70 Pro            5 & 15 kHz

2001 White's DFX            3 kHz & 15 kHz (Simulates single frequency by ignoring half the dual frequency signal)

2002 Minelab Sovereign Elite        BBS

2003 Minelab Explorer II        FBS

2004 Minelab Quattro MP            FBS

2004 Fisher CZ-3D            5 & 15 kHz

2005 Minelab Sovereign GT        BBS

2006 Minelab Explorer SE        FBS

2008 Minelab Explorer SE Pro        FBS

2009 Fisher CZ-21            5 & 15 kHz

2012 Minelab CTX 3030            FBS2


Selectable Frequency or Multi Frequency

2009 White's Spectra Vision        2.5 Khz or 7.5 kHz or 22.5 kHz or all three at once

2017 Minelab Equinox                  5 kHz or 10 kHz or 15 kHz or 20 kHz or 40 kHz plus multi frequency options

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it AKA machines never get a mention at all? With their single frequency coils, frequency can be changed the same way as the X-Terra range. With their selectable frequency coils, they don't utilise harmonics to select frequency, in contrast they utilise a simple mechanical switch to increase or decrease the amount of windings used inside the coil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because for all intents and purposes AKA machines do not exist in the United States. I wrote the article, and I only mention what pops into my head. I know next to nothing about AKA, and they are far enough off my personal radar that I simply did not think of them. Nothing nefarious, just the way it is. I will attempt to get more familiar with them, and perhaps even add them to the list when I know more, but the bottom line is if they want attention in the U.S. they need to do more to get it. A few dealers and a service center is the first step. I may be just a local yokel, but if I have to mail it out of the U.S. to get service than I am not interested.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good article Steve, but wrong on the harmonic info. Switchable frequency machines switch to different fundamental frequencies, not harmonics of the base frequency. Most of them run sinusoidal transmitters so there are no harmonics, and they switch in different capacitors to do so.

Also, the DFX doesn't really run in single frequency mode. It always transmits/receives 2 frequencies, just ignores one of them in "single" mode.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And by the way Ringmoney, feel free to start a thread on AKA and bring us up to speed. Like you asked, why does nobody mention AKA? That does include you also. I post stuff all the time just to be informative. There is no forum rule against others doing the same. I would welcome it!

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Geotech said:

Good article Steve, but wrong on the harmonic info. Switchable frequency machines switch to different fundamental frequencies, not harmonics of the base frequency. Most of them run sinusoidal transmitters so there are no harmonics, and they switch in different capacitors to do so.

Also, the DFX doesn't really run in single frequency mode. It always transmits/receives 2 frequencies, just ignores one of them in "single" mode.

 

OK, I need to edit that. Now that you point it out and I think about it, kind of obvious. If you are running at a single frequency there can be no harmonic in use.

Thanks Carl - I love learning stuff!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Steve Herschbach said:

OK, I need to edit that. Now that you point it out and I think about it, kind of obvious. If you are running at a single frequency there can be no harmonic in use!

Well, it's more complicated than that. Instead of a sinusoid, you could run a square wave drive which generates a triangle wave current, which does have a fundamental and harmonics. This is exactly what a Fisher CZ does. A SF detector could demodulate only the fundamental (ignore the harmonics), and vary the square wave frequency to whatever it wants, the advantage of which no coil capacitor needs to be selected. The V3 does it this way (in SF mode), and I'd guess (but don't know) that the Alter 71 does it this way, too. But I expect most of the switchable frequency detectors on your list run sinusoidal transmitters.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I try but there is a reason Carl why you design detectors and I just use them. I try to learn just enough to understand why the things I observe in the field happen the way they do, but my brain taps out after that. :smile: Luckily I stayed out of the whole harmonics thing in the magazine article.

I think my latest edit got it cleaned up - Thanks again.

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 Steve Herschbach
      The whole depth with single frequency VLF detectors thing in my opinion has been nothing but a red herring for decades. I have read a thousand posts from people wanting VLF detectors with "more depth". Yet VLF detectors maxed out for usable depth by at least 1990 if not before. I have not used any single frequency VLF metal detector since 1990 that got more depth on coins than my old Compass Gold Scanner Pro.

      The only real improvement we have seen and are still seeing is in the ability to find and correctly identify items that are masked by the ground itself or adjacent undesirable targets. There are an amazing number of targets in the ground at depths achievable by any decent detector made in the last 25 years, but that are being missed because they are improperly identified and ignored, or just completely masked and invisible. This is an area where the Minelab BBS and FBS detectors have excelled. They do not go deeper. They simply get more accurate discrimination at depths exceeding what most detectors achieve. Machines like the DEUS and a lot of other Euro machines are excelling not for the depth they get, but this ability to acquire and accurately identify targets at shallower depths that are missed by other detectors.

      If we had a detector that could simply see through everything and accurately identify coins to 10" the ground would light up with countless missed finds. I get a chuckle out of all the deep coins I see people talk about on the forums when the best detectors made can't accurately identify a dime past 5-6 inches in my soil. Anything deeper just gets called ferrous. There is huge room for improvement in metal detectors still not by getting more depth, but by simply finding shallower targets that have been missed by other detectors made up until now.
      How To Make Yourself Crazy!
      U.S. Versus Euro Style Detectors
    • By Tony
      From what I can gather, higher frequency VLF detectors are more suited for smaller gold but ground mineralisation may be something to factor in. Would there be a “better” frequency for nuggets 1 gram and above in heavy ground?
      I’m not too concerned if I miss sub gram nuggets if there is a better suited frequency.
      The old Garrett Groundhog circuitry was legendary in this country…..I think it was around the 15 kHz mark. Is this frequency range a good starting point or do I need to consider other things such as better ground balancing capabilities or Garrett’s extra coil voltage. 
      My Minelab PI units will be mainstay detectors but as mentioned in another post, I have ground littered in man made iron junk and the ground mineralisation is severe. There are plenty of nuggets in the 1 gram to 5 gram range (maybe bigger) but the iron signals are as dense as 5 per square metre 🤬
       Thanks for any ideas.
       
    • By water spider
      maybe we could have a multi frequency coil, that recieves a single frequency or selectable single frequency and effectively distorts and amplifies the single frequency resulting in frequency variants up and down, mimicking or creating smf
    • By Skullgolddiver
      After the good new I realized when tested a few days ago my machine after It drowned and I've succesfully reanimated It....
      Now the horrible gasket Is fighting to stay out of the housing against any kind of attempt😒.
      So I'm in the middle of a headache manutention session with scarce results.
      That's the Mood guys😑
       

    • By Tnsharpshooter
      See NASA-Tom’s comments
      https://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,181189
    • By Tnsharpshooter
      Don’t know any other better subforum to place this.
      When manufacturers design make sure platform can allow at least 2 software versions or at the very least allow what I call both newer version update (whole) and a older subset (portion of older version) to be used.  
      Why?
      Makes testing easier if and when a newer version is designed and requires pre release testing in the field for validation.   Would allow users after version release to use different versions and gain first hand feedback of the benefits or lack thereof of different versions or version subset(s).  Case in point.  Notice Minelab left old iron bias to be user selected when they released newer version with iron bias F2 option.  
      So in a nutshell this allows the detector versions ( or version subset) to be compared to the themselves in the field by the user.
      Xp should have done this too.  They should have designed Deus imo where at least  2 complete version allowed to be uploaded to unit.
      Notice the later released Ace Apex.  Garrett should have allowed on it too.  
      Don’t know what added production cost this would cause.  Hopefully not much.
       
×
×
  • Create New...