My Personal Method Of Ferrite Balancing

[Jonathan Porter]

16 hours ago, Andyy said:

And …. Saturation only affects X balance, not ground balance. 

And …. Semi Auto locks the X balance when you release the button (I proved this well in my testing) but allows the ground balance to track slowly. 

As an added note, my 14" coil was smoother in Semi Auto, than when I used to always have it set to Auto.  As JP has mentioned in the past, if you don't want to use the Ferrite, then he suggests Auto, but if you use the ferrite, we should lock it in with SemiAuto.

we will figure this out, yet...

As I questioned on a different link, what exactly saturation is …. still has me confused. 

In layman’s terms Saturation is where the concentrated highly magnetic mineralised pebbles and soils on the surface of the ground throw a field back at the Tx winding causing a small current to pass across the Tx which then manifests as a signal in your ears. You cannot ground balance out Saturation signal, it will always be there no matter what, unless you lower the Sensitivity, change Ground Type mode (EG go from Normal to Difficult) or use a less aggressive Gold mode (EG go from High Yield to General) or worst of all FILTER it OUT by introducing Audio Smoothing.

All PI detectors I have ever used Saturate, this is especially so with the new Flat wound coils on GPX machines. All Saturation signals compete with target signals so the operator needs to perfect their swing height manageament to keep the coil right on the cusp between Saturation noise intrusion into the threshold and maximum depth relative to a buried target. Once Saturation noise intrudes the level of noise that is generated adds to the general threshold noise of the detector effectively reducing sensitivity to a buried target (masking in other words).

Because the GPZ 7000 runs so quiet (assuming you are using sensible settings) Saturation noise can interfere or reduce sensitivity, a precious commodity gained through the GPZ’s ability to run Zero Stabilizer (Audio Smoothing OFF). If you introduce Audio Smoothing you mask or hide the effects of Saturation and EMI, both of which KILL depth. I think a lot of X coil users are running their detectors this way and are masking or hiding the differences.

All X coils that I have used SATURATE much more readily than Minelab coils, more noise equals less performance which is why I was trying so hard to see them improved before they went on sale.

JP

 

[Andyy]

33 minutes ago, Jonathan Porter said:

In layman’s terms Saturation is where the concentrated highly magnetic mineralised pebbles and soils on the surface of the ground throw a field back at the Tx winding causing a small current to pass across the Tx which then manifests as a signal in your ears. You cannot ground balance out Saturation signal, it will always be there no matter what, unless you lower the Sensitivity, change Ground Type mode (EG go from Normal to Difficult) or use a less aggressive Gold mode (EG go from High Yield to General) or worst of all FILTER it OUT by introducing Audio Smoothing.

I am in full agreement that the GPZ is a great machine to use and fairly easy to learn.  The questions we ask are not intended to make the machine seem more difficult to operate or to make us look or feel smarter for asking the direct pointed questions, or to frustrate JP :)  The truth is, that the more information we have on how something works, also helps us solve current or future problems that might come up, whether it is some strange coil, setting experimentation, or who knows what.   Many terms are used and assumed (sometimes incorrectly) leading to misunderstanding information.  I prefer not to assume.  And the fact that we have someone like JP on here to explain this stuff, is much appreciated.  For example, if the questions were not asked, I would still be using the octopus style ground balancing, which can still end up leaving the machine not ground balance to its full capability. 

Anyways, I have found this to be a very healthy discussion. 

 

[Rob Allison]

Hey Guys,

   Thanks and I agree with you, I think the GPZ is the simplest big detector to use.  That being said, many customers want to know all this technical stuff when they haven't even purchased the detector or used it yet.  

I guess the main reason is the potential customers download the instructional manual from Minelab's website, read it briefly and don't see any of this info for the most part in the manual.  They then want to question, why isn't Minelab showing any of this important info on how the detector runs ...... 

I appreciate all the info JP and others.  Great learning for all of us.  

[cobill]

9 hours ago, Rob Allison said:

I guess the main reason is the potential customers download the instructional manual from Minelab's website, read it briefly and don't see any of this info for the most part in the manual.  They then want to question, why isn't Minelab showing any of this important info on how the detector runs ...... 

Rob, 

Yep, I was trained to use Auto GB 4 years ago and trusted the GPZ. Now, from the posts, tips, etc. I know I've NEVER had a good GB for the past 4 years and probably missed alot of gold!?

Good thing you can "teach an old dog new tricks".

Bill

[Jonathan Porter]

4 hours ago, cobill said:

Rob, 

Yep, I was trained to use Auto GB 4 years ago and trusted the GPZ. Now, from the posts, tips, etc. I know I've NEVER had a good GB for the past 4 years and probably missed alot of gold!?

Good thing you can "teach an old dog new tricks".

Bill

Things have changed in those four years Bill, I used to detect totally differently with the GPZ four years ago two. There’s been two upgrades in that time and everyone including Minelab have come to know ZVT tech a lot better. It’s easy to forget the GPZ is a first of its kind metal detector in the world, the complexity in getting the electronics to work in the first place were immense, thanks to Minelab its been achieved.

JP

[cobill]

Quote

 

"Not using a Ferrite means you will never know if your X balance is out, relying on Auto means you are relying on the detectors algorithm to find the X balance for you which is OK in soils were X signal is minimal, in Australia this (and Arizona because I have detected there) is not a good thing in my opinion. Using Quick-Trak could potentially exacerbate things because Quick-Trak forces the G and X tracking, if the detector does not get a good look at X signal during this stage the X balance will have to be out. This is not a problem if there is no X signal in your ground which is suggested by your GPZ successes.

X balance is needed because no electronics are exactly the same and prefect and no two coils are EXACTLTY the same and perfect, as such there can be slight temperature drift in ZVT allowing X signal to come through. This is especially true with the X coils.

The detector in the environment does not always know the difference between Salt signal, Saturation signal and X signal as such it can become confused if too much Salt signal or Saturation signal is present in Auto mode, this then could cause the X balance to no longer be optimal hence the release of the Ferrite to allow the detector to see an optimal X signal, this is why I advocate the use of Semi-Auto and the Ferrite to prevent this from happening, even for low X ground. The first GPZs had a very lively X balance in Auto mode which potentially allowed Salt and Saturation signals to interfere with the X balance, this was later refined in the first update and carries through to today.

Salt Ground can also have variable amounts of G and varying amounts of X signals as well as Saturation signals, you the operator cannot always tell mainly due to the Salt signal being so dominant. Having a good Ferrite balance that is fixed to the units operating temperature in this case is best, to avoid the X balance moving away from optimum. If X is not present then there is no issue. If Saturation is not present then there is no issue."

Hope this helps

JP

 

Thanks JP!

Bill

[mn90403]

JP

You have described the issue very well.  Now can you describe how far 'out' it could be and what are the potential missed targets?  What if someone just follows the prompts on the Z when they turn it on and swing over ground and no ferrite?

What I mean is ... do you have kind-of-a 'real world' example of a find(s) that have been made with the semi-auto balancing you describe vs the auto?  Is it like a 5% improvement, 10% or what?  More depth and/or more what?  And perhaps less noise ... etc.

I know many good detectorists in Cal-Az-Nv who just keep the same settings, do an EMI and run out and find more nuggets.  Some stay in auto and have not updated the machine.  Are they going to find more if they ferrite balance this way?

Mitchel

If this has been answered before just let me know.  I can't keep up with all the threads.

[Jin]

removed post

[flakmagnet]

2 hours ago, mn90403 said:

Are they going to find more if they ferrite balance this way?

So Mitchel in other words; if they go over exactly the same ground, in the exactly the same way, are they going to find more if they ferrite balance this way?