arizflash

Ghostminer - I've had a great time reading your stories the last few months. Thank you.

Steve,

I belive your proposed rules are fair.

Alan

Thanks Rob for the quick review. Also thanks to Steve for the update on the sensitivity change.

So based on the updated patent White's must have some prototypes in the field and getting feedback for improvements.

I noticed a major change in the new patent is providing additional signalling and power switching networks that provide higher voltages to the higher frequency pulses to maintain the same half sine amplitude. Based on my reading the old patent provided for a constant voltage across the multiple frequency pulses which resulted in a lower amplitude half sine wave on the higher frequencies and caused a performance degradation.

I cannot fathom the computational processing necessary for maintaining different voltage levels for on micro-second pulses across multiple frequencies and varying these voltage levels based on the ground matrix readings. Also to have a power switching network that keeps up with this micro-second demand rate.  I think "Moore's Law" is becoming applicable to metal detector designs.

I was reading on another forum that White's is testing a prototype detector in Australia. No details given just a statement. Anyone here know anything more?

Alan

Steve,

I can't imagine a 8.6 earthquake. That has to be an indelible memory.

I was living in the 2nd floor barracks in Pt Hueneme, CA while attending a Navy A-School when the 6.6 San Fernando earthquake happened of Feb. 9, 1971. I was laying in bed reading and the bed started walking across the floor. Pt Hueneme was about 50 miles from the epicenter. It really scared the hell out of me.

Also I believe the Richter scale is logaritmic so a 8.6 earthquake is 100 times more powerful than a 6.6 earthquake.

Alan