Issue With Axiom And Ground Noise

[Steve Herschbach]

Defective or just places a Axiom falls on its face. That's hard for me to imagine with the range of adjustment it has. You should be able to get quiet stable performance on any ground. It may or may not still pick up gold but honestly that is kind of beside the point. If you can't get the machine stable something is wrong. Last minute changes were made to the software, stuff I've never run, and maybe they screwed something up in the process. Well, other than passing this thread on the Garrett I'm just an observer here like anyone else. I hope it gets sorted out one way or the other for you, even if that means simply ditching the Axiom and using something else that works better for you.

There is no requirement for anyone to be patient with Garrett, whether over misplaced washers, and certainly not on a total machine failure. Everyone has a right to their own feelings and experiences here, without being told by others what those feelings should be. In other words, everyone should speak only for themselves, not for others.

[jasong]

2 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Defective or just places a Axiom falls on its face. That's hard for me to imagine with the range of adjustment it has. You should be able to get quiet stable performance on any ground. It may or may not still pick up gold but honestly that is kind of beside the point. If you can't get the machine stable something is wrong.

He does it get it fairly stable (for highly variable ground anyways) in that video he posted by switching to Normal and re-ground balancing. The problems he was pointing out I think are two: it won't pick up the 0.1 gram nugget when he does achieve stability, and it seems to "false" when coil touches the ground. (I'm using "false" for lack of a better term there).

Case 1  w/nugget sensitivity - It's normal to lose sensitivity to smaller gold for any PI in highly variable ground. I think you are saying the same thing too? Also his X (I assume its X?) is going from 50 to 60, while Lunk's is going 58 to 62. So it's definitely more variable ground - thus should be expected to be tougher to get stable without more sensitivity loss. 

Case 2 the part where the coil touches the ground can indicate a bad coil or some control unit problem in another PI though, hard to tell from the vid. But again, in highly variable soils this also happens with my 45, 6, and 7 as the control unit struggles to recompute quick enough (that's what it feels like anyways). Even just tapping the coil against a rock in these cases is enough to cause this ground signaling. It almost only ever happens in highly variable X ground, just being hot ground usually isn't enough.

Anyways, that's the report distilled into the two relevant issues I think. This stuff is all normal with other PI's. I guess the question really is "what is normal and abnormal with an Axiom"? Is there really a problem here? Have to admit my interest is selfish here as working highly variable wash bottoms is one of the main reasons I still have a lot of interest in watching Axiom performance. Left almost all the really variable washes undetected, sort of a last remaining bastion my 6 and 7 won't work at all in. But I can see a potential for my comments being counterproductive here as well since I simply know nothing about the Axiom in specific - if that's the case please let me know and I'll just lurk again. 🙂

[blackjack]

9 hours ago, Gone Bush said:

A fair question without an easy answer.

Based on its performance today, at that particular tenement, I would say it’s the best thing since strawberry flavoured lube.
Based on yesterday morning, at that particular location, I would say same same as 6000 but much better on hot rocks.
Based on yesterday afternoon, at that particular location, I would say it’s a boat anchor.
Based on the day before that, at that particular location, I would say I would rather have the clap.

On some ground it certainly appears to be an over full bucket of crap.
On todays patch, I couldn’t have wanted a better detector.

Still have not determined the cause for such varying performance.
This particular unit may have a defect of some kind that, on hot ground, causes it to take a dump.
Have pretty much eliminated the usual suspects like coil, connectors etc.
Assumed from previous days/locations that choosing today’s location, (where 6000 needs constant attention to be stable), would confirm that Axiom is a faulty unit.
End result, as stated, was the exact opposite. 
Now I have to choose another location that I know is hotter than normal and try again.
Fiona has her 4800 that we use to gauge ground conditions so if Axiom has difficulty on ground that is relatively ok with a little bit of tuning on the 4800 I know there is a problem with the Axiom.
Just keep trying different locations and settings in an attempt to narrow down the cause.

Might resolve it tomorrow, might take a week. How long is a piece of string?
 

Keep posting your results, when you sort it out, give us a comparison, with the machines you are familiar with. I understand that christmas can be a frustrating time, when you need a part a or a service and every things closed till after the new year.   My first post was me just being popping my head out of my hole and being a 'Bunny'. For those that don't get the reference it's a term used in cricket by a bowler directed to a batsman who always plays defensively and so is not scoring but is hard to get out and therefore is not contributing to the game. In this situation a fielder may quip to the bowler ' bowl him a piano, see if he can play that.'

[Gone Bush]

55 minutes ago, jasong said:

He does it get it fairly stable (for highly variable ground anyways) in that video he posted by switching to Normal and re-ground balancing. The problems he was pointing out I think are two: it won't pick up the 0.1 gram nugget when he does achieve stability, and it seems to "false" when coil touches the ground. (I'm using "false" for lack of a better term there).

Case 1  w/nugget sensitivity - It's normal to lose sensitivity to smaller gold for any PI in highly variable ground. I think you are saying the same thing too? Also his X (I assume its X?) is going from 50 to 60, while Lunk's is going 58 to 62. So it's definitely more variable ground - thus should be expected to be tougher to get stable without more sensitivity loss. 

Case 2 the part where the coil touches the ground can indicate a bad coil or some control unit problem in another PI though, hard to tell from the vid. But again, in highly variable soils this also happens with my 45, 6, and 7 as the control unit struggles to recompute quick enough (that's what it feels like anyways). Even just tapping the coil against a rock in these cases is enough to cause this ground signaling. It almost only ever happens in highly variable X ground, just being hot ground usually isn't enough.

Anyways, that's the report distilled into the two relevant issues I think. This stuff is all normal with other PI's. I guess the question really is "what is normal and abnormal with an Axiom"? Is there really a problem here? Have to admit my interest is selfish here as working highly variable wash bottoms is one of the main reasons I still have a lot of interest in watching Axiom performance. Left almost all the really variable washes undetected, sort of a last remaining bastion my 6 and 7 won't work at all in. But I can see a potential for my comments being counterproductive here as well since I simply know nothing about the Axiom in specific - if that's the case please let me know and I'll just lurk again. 🙂

You are right on the money.

Stability is attainable to a point than makes Axiom usable, even on the variable creek wash, but at the expense of small gold around that 0.10 gram.

And yes, while many are saying it’s a faulty unit, I am still yet to be sure of that hence still playing about with it.

[peterinaust]

In the new year, was thinking of a 6000 and followed the problems it was having and seems to be ok now. And then the Axiom came along and made me lean more towards the Axiom, and you started having trouble (looks like the only one though) should be a few more in oz by now? you would think.

Thank you so much for posting and spending so much time to try and get to the bottom of this problem, when you could be out finding gold.

I wander if Garrett in the US follow DP? and chase it up with Garrett in oz. From what we hear Garrett are very good with warranty. We will see.

Thank you thank you for posting.

Cheers Peter.

[Gone Bush]

This is the text from a DM I sent yesterday to Steve H:

“Stockholm syndrome is real.
After yesterday, even though I am reasonably confident this unit has an issue, I don’t want to admit it.
Yesterdays location has, for reasons I don’t know, always been a very difficult location to detect.
Not overly hot per se but mineralised in such a way that every detector I have tried there has real difficulties.
Last year I was there with a friend and we stuffed around for a giggle and tried his 7000, my 6000, his SDC and even my Garrett Sea Hunter Mk II amongst others.
None of them operated anywhere near as perfectly as Axiom yesterday.
Depth varies dramatically from bedrock visible to three feet of what appears to be a combination of calcium rich wash gravels and WA typical high Fe content fines.
Without analysis I can’t be sure what it is but I do know that how Axiom handled it was one of the most impressive things I have seen in some time.
After I took the video I cranked it up to 8 and played around for a bit.
Normally, from experience with particularly 6000, it would be very difficult to determine a target from the undulating ground noise while pushing that much power into the ground in that location.
But Axiom easily maintained good separation between a low sound wave peak on ground noise and a much higher peak on a target.
Wave duration also was markedly different between target and ground.
No doubt what was a target and what was a noise pocket.
If I didn’t know better I would say this was the location Garrett did all R & D on Axiom. It was that good there.
I have no doubt now that Axiom, maxed out, is pushing much more power, for want of a better term, into its pulse than 6000.
Im not all that technical so I hope you are picking up what I’m putting down.
Some decent non Garrett coils and Axiom will, in my opinion and quoting Dr. Emmet Brown, see some serious shit.”

 

Currently there is no option for me to do anything about getting Axiom replaced even if I was 100% sure it is a faulty unit.
So, I am taking the time to be sure and at this point it’s still 50/50.
Hard to believe that a detector can work so well on ground that historically I would call extreme, (admittedly due to mineralisation different to what you would normally call extreme), but has issues in a creek bed that would also rate extreme.
The creek bed is definitely a more varied ground but the difference between the way Axiom responds between the two is dramatic.

What you saw as a target in the video was a shot gun pellet 0.18 grams roughly 105mm (4 and a bit bald eagles) deep.
The reason I chose that spot in amongst the trees was because I had been over it several times with 6000 and was (wrongly) sure no targets existed to interfere with diagnosing a problem with Axiom
Its also one of the more difficult areas on that tenement.
Unusual for a pellet to be more than an inch or two down so we raked all the leaves and debris out to find that it appears someone has dumped the equivalent of maybe four wheelbarrows of dirt there and years of erosion have washed the mound down until it’s barely noticeable and when covered with leaves and debris, unnoticeable.
In the video you can see that the target location is slightly elevated in comparison to the ground around it.
Being a nice shady spot, I know I have been through there at least twice previously with 6000 and missed that target.
That in itself and as a one off doesn’t prove much other than most likely I didn’t do a very good job previously or possibly but unlikely 6000 couldn’t process the extreme ground well enough to show me the target. I would lean towards the first likelihood.
Axion heard the pellet on 6 and as you see in the video, it was quite a clear signal and similar in tone and shape to the test nugget sitting on the surface.
When I took sensitivity to 8, it fairly well blew my skirt up and yet was still usably stable on surrounding ground.

Yesterday has proven one thing above all else, I must retract my previous statement.
Regardless of any possible fault in this particular Axion, I would always want one in the detector tool box.
That is based on only using it around Kalgoorlie where every piece of available ground has been hammered to death.
I must stress that it has yet to find gold but I believe that to be a reflection of my location rather than a deficiency in Axiom.
Was I 1000 klms further north in my backyard, I am 100% confident there would be gold in my bottle.
Unfortunately, at this time of year, it’s so hot up there that if you wear safety orange you burst into flames.
And let’s not forget that gold in the bottle is the point of the exercise and ultimately reveals all about a detector and it’s operator.

At this point in the journey and given that for the last 18 months I have exclusively used and been successful with a 6000 I would say this:

Only allowed one detector and only with coils supplied by the detector manufacturer - Axiom
Only allowed one detector with any coils of my choosing - 6000 with Rohan’s excellent NF 12 x 7 and 16 x 10 monos

Based just on experience and without any scientific test to back me up (gulp) I think a maxed out 6000 is probably equivalent to setting 6 or 7 on a production version Axiom with the higher available gain.
So once the coil manufacturers give us coils that allow Axiom to be run maxed out the majority of the time I would absolutely expect it to overtake 6000 in grams.
Then, combined with the many other things I have previously mentioned (build quality, adjustability, weight, balance, battery life etc etc) that already elevate it above 6000, Axiom would be my first choice.

I am grateful for the ability to afford multiple detectors so, for me, 6000 and Axiom (either current unit or replacement if this one proves to indeed be moody) will be cell mates into the foreseeable future.
As I typed the above sentence I realised that, as of today, I can’t even be sure the specific Axiom I currently have is operating completely as intended and yet like it enough to not be without one regardless of what other detectors I have available to use.
That in itself is telling.

While waiting to speak with Garrett, I will continue to advise you all with anything relevant that occurs while using Axiom.

Have a safe and Happy Christmas.
 

[Gone Bush]

17 hours ago, Gold Catcher said:

Thanks, Gone Bush. Yes indeed, many areas in CA have serious hot rock issues, either due to volcanic activities (Mojave desert in the South) or due the nature of the iron rich geology of the motherlode belt (i.e. Serpentine schist, North). Now, we also have better and milder grounds for detecting, so it is certainly not all that bad across the entire state. It just would be nice to have a workable and light machine available for these problematic areas where other machines can't be used (with the GPZ being perhaps an exception, with the settings I described). Although in AU the nature of the soil is very different, you surely don't lack difficult ground conditions there neither (!), so the Axiom could be a great value detector with its reported GB capabilities. It would be very interesting to go back to the same spot where you shot the clip to see if the same test nugget would be picked up after the fix. But this might be a long journey, so probably not feasible. I hope you can at least use the Axiom in less hot grounds during your trip, with some nice gold for you to take home regardless. You surely earned it. Good luck!

GC

If Garrett decide to replace the unit, as I believe they will want to do, my first trip will be back to that exact creek bed location.
Only 45 klms out so well worth the trip to see the results.
Overall, excluding the currently unknown noise issue, it’s ground balance and hot rock abilities are the best I have seen in any detector ever.

[Aureous]

Interesting issue GB....Not owning an Axiom, but with 8 months behind a 6000, I can state that there IS some ground that it absolutely hates. Remembering my many years prospecting in WA, regarding that silty ground and the fine laterite soils, SOME are totally unstable to various detectors and perfect on others. I remember walking away from a laterite patch near Ora Banda using a 3000 and went back the following year with an old 2100 and it was fine. 

Here in Vic, Ive found several patches of near-surface orange clay, that when moist, are a 'walk away' situation. No amount of dumbing down the detector will help. But Ive used a Gold Bug 2 on these patches without issue. Go figure....

Initially, I looked at the video and thought... "he kept tracking off in that noise???" But you later said it was equally hopeless with it on so there's goes that theory lol. As shown above, there seems to be some benefit occasionally in switching to a manual ground balance machine and trying again, but it seems very likely that the soil on that patch has either a sodium or aluminium content. Both of which are soluble with water flow and deposit in upper layers of the soil profile once the ground water evaporates. If anyone has ever tried to use a detector on bauxite-derived silt, you'll get the picture. Its like a wet beach x10 as far as noise goes. Ive learned from a couple geologists that even zinc infused silt does the same. I'm imagining that this is your issue. 

I very much want the Axiom to be the detector that everyone uses as a bench mark for years to come and shakes ML from their comfort zone, so I hope your future evaluations bring a smile to your face. 

[Steve Herschbach]

7 hours ago, jasong said:

He does it get it fairly stable (for highly variable ground anyways) in that video he posted by switching to Normal and re-ground balancing. The problems he was pointing out I think are two: it won't pick up the 0.1 gram nugget when he does achieve stability, and it seems to "false" when coil touches the ground. (I'm using "false" for lack of a better term there).

Case 1  w/nugget sensitivity - It's normal to lose sensitivity to smaller gold for any PI in highly variable ground. I think you are saying the same thing too? Also his X (I assume its X?) is going from 50 to 60, while Lunk's is going 58 to 62. So it's definitely more variable ground - thus should be expected to be tougher to get stable without more sensitivity loss. 

Case 2 the part where the coil touches the ground can indicate a bad coil or some control unit problem in another PI though, hard to tell from the vid. But again, in highly variable soils this also happens with my 45, 6, and 7 as the control unit struggles to recompute quick enough (that's what it feels like anyways). Even just tapping the coil against a rock in these cases is enough to cause this ground signaling. It almost only ever happens in highly variable X ground, just being hot ground usually isn't enough.

Anyways, that's the report distilled into the two relevant issues I think. This stuff is all normal with other PI's. I guess the question really is "what is normal and abnormal with an Axiom"? Is there really a problem here? Have to admit my interest is selfish here as working highly variable wash bottoms is one of the main reasons I still have a lot of interest in watching Axiom performance. Left almost all the really variable washes undetected, sort of a last remaining bastion my 6 and 7 won't work at all in. But I can see a potential for my comments being counterproductive here as well since I simply know nothing about the Axiom in specific - if that's the case please let me know and I'll just lurk again. 🙂

I’ve said I think it’s defective based on my use, Lunk says the same, the lead engineer concurs. How many more opinions are needed that something is not right? I left myself an out with my statement though because unless it’s me there on the ground holding the detector in my own hands, there is a degree of speculation left, not 100% certainty.

I’ve never had a hint of coil knock ever, with any Axiom coil, on any ground, at any setting. That enough is all I need to see to say something is not right.

[Aureous]

8 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

I’ve never had a hint of coil knock ever, with any Axiom coil, on any ground, at any setting. That enough is all I need to see to say something is not right.

Maybe Im missing something in this very long thread, but GB states that in other locations, the Axiom runs amazingly well? Im thinking that the knock noise is a coil axis issue due to the severe soil. In these mineral soil conditions, the soil becomes conductive like salt but worse.  In the zinc soil I mentioned, the Geologists could run a DC current thru the dirt for several meters. The earth field becomes amplified also. But like you said Steve, without physically being there, its all guess work and we could all be completely wrong....