X-Terra Pro - Do We Need Another Single Frequency Detector?

[mcjtom]

On 3/28/2023 at 9:23 AM, StarVatrex said:

But the question is...is It REALLY a single frecuency ?!? How Minelab get that stability on beaches?.

Did anybody shed some light on it, out of curiosity?

[Geotech]

It's single frequency in that it only transmits a single frequency square wave. But that square wave has odd-order harmonics and the 3rd harmonic can be demodulated as a pseudo-second frequency and used for salt cancellation. Because the 3rd harmonic is much weaker, it does not make an effective second frequency for the purpose of detecting targets. That is, if you transmit a 5kHz square wave, the 15kHz 3rd harmonic is useful for salt cancellation but otherwise the detector performs mostly like a 5kHz single frequency.

If this sounds familiar, it's exactly how the Fisher CZs did it back in 1991.

[phrunt]

3 hours ago, Geotech said:

It's single frequency in that it only transmits a single frequency square wave. But that square wave has odd-order harmonics and the 3rd harmonic can be demodulated as a pseudo-second frequency and used for salt cancellation. Because the 3rd harmonic is much weaker, it does not make an effective second frequency for the purpose of detecting targets. That is, if you transmit a 5kHz square wave, the 15kHz 3rd harmonic is useful for salt cancellation but otherwise the detector performs mostly like a 5kHz single frequency.

If this sounds familiar, it's exactly how the Fisher CZs did it back in 1991.

Why has it taken so long for other detectors to do the same? Top of the line Fisher likes the F75 and T2 are rather poor on salt water beaches when if they had the technology, why didn't they keep using it on top models to make them better.  

Detector manufacturers often puzzle me.  It takes another manufacturer to come along 30 odd years later and take advantage of the technology to make a great beach detector using single frequency at a low end price, using the technology to make a basic cheap detector handle beaches so they didn't have to make it multi frequency and take a hit to the perceived value of the higher end machines..

They were smart to come up with it 30+ years ago, they were crazy to not keep using it in all high end models to give them a big edge.  They gave away a cool technology, Minelab would have had it all patented up.  

[EL NINO77]

I'm posting a video from my colleague Prymek... where he shows really well the technical possibilities of the 1 frequency X-Terra Pro compared to the multi-frequency in the Equinox 900 detector...

The terrain is mineralized with magnetite..., that's why in X terra for ..even low-conductivity targets at 15 and 18 cm in the terrain ..they give a relatively high VDI in the zone of high-conductivity targets..., but there is also a visible difference in the work of the detectors if cover the target with a piece of ceramic...

in easy terrain, and free weekend detection..these differences between the two detectors may not be that big,,,but when you go into difficult terrain conditions,,,you start to see the difference in the work of both detectors,,,

[mcjtom]

4 hours ago, EL NINO77 said:

a visible difference in the work of the detectors if cover the target with a piece of ceramic.

He mentions that his 'invisible enemy' ceramic piece contains some iron, but it wouldn't be detectable as a target.  But what is it and how does it mask the target in the ground already mineralized with magnetite?

[EL NINO77]

Prymek... reminds in the video, that you can dig up iron from the field with a detector and thus clean the field of iron,,,,,
for better detection of targets .. so ceramics that are still left in the ground because they are not detectable ... can still mask well the targets placed under it...
It is an indicator of the possibility of 1 frequency in X terra, and multi-frequency in Equinox 900...

 

[Geotech]

21 hours ago, phrunt said:

Why has it taken so long for other detectors to do the same?

Dunno, I proposed this at White's and again at FTP, no interest.