Jump to content

Metal Detector Search Coil - Antenna Or... ?

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, MikePfeiffer said:

Basically you want the antenna tuned (impedance matching) to the TV for best reception. Same applies to the metal detector.

Detector coils are not antenna. They are part of a highly tuned inductive coupling system.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Detector coils are not antenna. They are part of a highly tuned inductive coupling system.

Whatever, I am sure we will know the details soon.

The detector coils are most certainly either a set of transmit receive anntenas or a single antenna doing double duty .... the detector signal is transmitted into the ground and the disturbance to that electrical field is received by the Antenna (coil)... with out an antenna nothing would be transmitted....or received by the detector....

Also, impedance matching is important to enable the flow of electrical energy but that is only part of the picture...the coil must also be electrical tuned to the operating frequency to reach full transmission power.. 

Transmit and receive antennas are an inductively coupled affair ....and that's why tunning them is so important...otherwise nothing gets induced...

Cheers Tye

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Detector coils are not antennae, they are designed as a transformer. There is no EM propagation, only a local magnetic field.

The coils don't have to be impedance-matched to anything. Most RX coils are just connected to a high-impedance preamp, with some token load resistor (typically 10k). Some designs throw in a few extra components to reduce EMI.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they transmit/induce  an electrical field into the either buy design ... that is the very definition of an antenna ...not To mention the fact that they are tuned to the output of the detectors transmitter... a local field is propagation .... it's just not going very far ....


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry....but transformers on power poles do not radiate electromagnetic energy by design .... that is the big difference .... there is a little leakage however

Thanks for the info about how the coil is impedance matched to the output of the detector....that's pretty common in other sorts of electronics....



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tye, in case you do not know, Geotech is Carl Moreland, currently Engineering Manager, First Texas Products (Bounty Hunter, Fisher, Teknetics). He is the long time owner of the top notch Geotech website and co-author with George Overton of this book...

Inside the Metal Detector explains theory and offers numerous experiments and projects that demonstrate the theory. You can build an off-resonance pinpointer, a GEB-discriminator, and a microprocessor-controlled PI detector. Even if you're not inclined to build a detector, the concepts learned from ITMD will help you better understand how your own detector works and what all those controls are really doing. The book can be purchased in paperback or Kindle versions on Amazon

For what it is worth I have in the past talked about coils "being like antenna" or "basically being antenna" so am guilty of spreading that line of thought myself. The analogy works in some regards but is not technically correct so I am trying to clean up my act in that regard.

Here is a great article by Carl - Coil Basics

If you think about what "induction balance" infers it is a system in perfect balance, neither transmitting or receiving but creating a magnetic field.


  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Thanks for telling Tye.


Thanks for replying. I was mentally building more into the circuit than you are describing, However, I do not fully understand. Why would you not impedance match and get all the signal strength you can. What about the TX coil. Please don't tell me it is just 50 turns of wire attached to a 3904 transistor.

(Sorry Carl, I think I got it. Your just ringing a coil with a specified frequency.)

I guess I am going to have to go back and reread your book 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 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
    • 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.  
      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.
    • By Northeast
      This was mentioned by geof_junk in another thread and had a little Google.  
      Found this  https://www.phys.k-state.edu/reu2011/nnorvell/Metal_Detector_Research.html
      I don’t really understand the technical side of metal detectors.  Does this have any application to current day detectors?  Will it help cancel out ground noise more?  Will the current crossing/not crossing the ‘bridge’ tell you something about what is under one of the receive coils.  
      Although I don’t understand it, I am amazed and a little in awe of those that do  👍
  • Create New...