Open Source Metal Detector

[jasong]

With modern ARM or similar type MCU's with some of the DSP capabilities built in and programming easily altered or updated I'm not sure I understand anymore why we are still stuck with the solid state mindset that x detector has to be y frequency only. A guy shouldn't have an issue switching to 60khz or 30khz or 7.5khz or whatever he wants without having to buy proprietary peripherals like special coils.

 

This doesn't have a lot to do with the Makros in particular, but this line of thought leads me to really wonder when we see the first "open source" detector. IE, one that allows us to go in and hack around in the programming, and open source schematics so we can make custom mods without figuring out how to dissolve 5 layers of epoxy potting without killing the components or having to brute force decrypt MCU coding.

 

So, since I know the Makro guys read this forum, if a company really wanted to take the next step and to be revolutionary in the detector world - provide us all with 2 open source platforms (meaning both software and hardware open source) - a PI and a VLF. Breakout all the relevant MCU pins too or allow easy access to hook up another dev board like the BeagleBoard, Raspberry PI, etc along with the interface to a computer for programming. Detectors, even Minelab, until the last few years have really been stuck in the stone age it seems to me any computer or phone nowadays allows for all kinds of mods and hacking.

 

I think you'd see a lot of real interesting innovation happening by DIY'ers within a few years with a platform like this, and it might give Minelab some pause at offering detectors at (disclaimer, just a guess) $8,000 or whatever.

 

Sorry to ramble, this post just got me thinking.

[Ivansgarage]

Hey Jasong   Ya just look at the Deus it has a variable  frequency that can be switched with one push of a button, just by adding diff programs.

 

Ivan

[Reno Chris]

All I can say is that I've never seen a multi-frequency unit that is as nearly hot as a single frequency unit can be - so there is a reason why the multi-frequency machines currently on the market are not that hot on smaller gold. If you have a single frequency, you can tune the coil to work best with that frequency. If you have multi-frequency then you must of needs make compromises to run the coil at a variety of frequencies. Just in the same way that the mid-frequency do-it-all type design needs to be one with many compromises to make coin, jewelry, relic and gold hunters happy - sort of at least. The result is that these machines do everything sort of OK, but they do nothing great.

We have loads of machines with lots of compromises to "sort of" do it all. I would way rather see the gold racer as a dedicated gold machine that does gold prospecting great. Because nuggets tend to be small and commonly located in highly mineralized ground, gold detecting is perhaps the most challenging metal detector application for the engineers who design these machines.

Honestly, most prospectors are not DIYers who want to spend hundreds of hours in the garage testing,re-programming, tweaking and then retesting their machines in an endless do-loop of forever fiddling. There are guys like that and I say more power to them, but they are a tiny, tiny segment of the market, like you can count them on your fingers. That's why the makers of detectors have little interest in that market.

For those who want a do-it-all machine, there are a huge number of choices, all very similar, some makers make multiple machines that fall into this category. The Makro Racer is one of these.

For the serious prospector who wants to get out in the field and go find gold, when it comes to a VLF, he will look for a dedicated, no compromise IB detector designed for detecting gold. A detector that can see a nugget of 0.05 grams, handles mineralized ground as well as possible and gives a decent discrimination result. Currently there are not that many choices in this market segment and all the designs are more than 10 years old and have frequencies higher than 50 Khz. We could use another entry into that market.

[Gold Seeker]

I agree that having detectors that are tweakable/hackable would most likely not be a great selling point, while there are some detectorists that have the tech know how to do the hacking to personalize a detector to their liking, a large percentage of detectorists will most likely make the detector less sensitive than it was originally, if not completely useless.

 

On another note, I'm not all that knowledgeable on how detectors and coils are tuned to each other, but if I'm not mistaken a coil has nothing but winding inside it with no electronics, so therefore I believe that a detector is tuned to the particular a coil/s instead of the coil/s being tuned to the detector, anyone with knowledge of this tuning process please add your input.

[jasong]

I understand what you are saying, but most phone users aren't DIY'er or garage tinkers either, yet take a look at the thriving Google/Apple app markets. You do not have to know how to program your phone to use any range of apps that turn your phone into an x, y, or z.

 

I'm not suggesting that most people would need to learn to program an MCU. I'm suggesting opening up that possibility so that those of us who do enjoy doing so can create programs for ourselves and to share with or sell to others. 

 

There could eventually be a detector program market that exceeds the aftermarket coil market or greater. (inevitably someone would also bank off making an "app" store too - note to first adopter manufacturers hint hint).

 

Eventually it may be that requesting x detector have y feature be as easy as waiting for some tinkerer to make that program. With so much reliance on digital electronics now, I'm not certain I believe that 1 detector can't be great at 2 different functions, even if that is true with OEM stock models in the present time.

 

Similarly, open up the hardware platform and schematics to those people who enjoy EE/Physics/etc.

 

Detecting technology has frankly, been more or less in the stone age compared to the rest of the tech world with the possible exception of the last few years, at least that's how it seems to me, especially after disassembling a few and being shocked at whats inside...not taking advantage of dirt cheap MCU and DSP and relying on circuitry that looked like it was based off older circuitry from the 70's - I'm looking at you US companies... I have a hard time making the same limited assumptions that I see about what a machine can be that a lot of others make on forums.

[jasong]

Coils are basically antennas and can be matched for impedence, frequency, etc.

 

I'm not suggesting the selling point would be that anyone can muck around and screw their detectors up though. Think about it this way, if your Dell computer only ran programs built by Dell would you buy it? Or if they only allowed Microsoft programs to operate on Microsoft operating systems? Or Google only allowed Google apps on your phone? If a person had an idea to improve something and those companies made it competely impossible to do so how do you think using your phone, your computer today would be? If anytime someone had an idea they had to ask the company to do it and hope the company listened how slow do you think we would see tech advances and how much money do you think they would charge on those monopolies?

 

That's pretty much how the detector world seems to work. It's an outdated paradigm.

 

Further, in those examples those are companies with hundreds of thousands of top notch engineers globally. There are so very few "detector engineers" in the world I have a hard time believing that they alone have optimized and perfected detecting technology.

[Gold Seeker]

Jason,

 

 I can see where you're right with the companies being behind the times when comparing the electronics of detectors to computers and smartphones of today and as the younger tech savvy generation future detectorists are getting into this hobby I can see this being the future of detectors.

 

That being said and in respect of not hijacking this topic, maybe you could start a new topic on this subject and see what the interest of others on this subject is.  

[jasong]

Yep sorry, didn't mean to change the subject. Just thought Makro might be the type of company to listen, and/or tell me it ain't happenin' son. Ok, no more hijacking.

[vanursepaul]

although I'm not a developer type I enjoyed listening to that idea of open source and I think it would be interesting to start another thread just to see who else is.....

and believe me I really think the people at Makro are reading....

imho

[Reno Chris]

I also would like to see Steve break this into a separate thread.

 

I think we are talking about several things here - hardware tinkering, software programming and use of existing software to adjust the settings and performance.

 

provide us all with 2 open source platforms (meaning both software and hardware open source) - a PI and a VLF. Breakout all the relevant MCU pins too or allow easy access to hook up another dev board

 

I just don't see any more than a very small number who have any interest in tinkering with the hardware, adding boards, messing with the electronics. Very few do that kind of thing with their cell phones either. Writing programs to do the signal analysis - I dont think that is of interest to any but a very small number either. How many folks actually write their own cell phone aps? However, using the programs in the detector to alter settings and responses - that's a trend that has been going on a long time, both in VLF and PI detectors. The big step of the GPX series over the GP series is greater flexibility to set or program the detector to optimize its performance. This trend continues in the newer machines.

However prospectors tend to be a cantankerous bunch and many complained that the GPX 5000 has too many settings and possibilities and they are never quite sure of what to use.