Steve Herschbach Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 USPTO Patent Application 20160041292 , Discrimination method of a metal detector. http://www.freshpatents.com/-dt20160211ptan20160041292.php "In particular, the present invention is a discrimination method that is insensitive to the signals from both resistive and reactive signal components from the soil. It was discovered for the purpose of the present invention that the presence of resistive signal components from the soil may be confused with resistive signal components from metallic targets, and thus identifying the time constant spectrum of the metallic target yields in unsatisfactory results in the presence of substantial resistive signal components from the soil. The discrimination method offered by the present invention is insensitive to both resistive and reactive signal components from the soil, which may also include a component due to a substantially uniform conducting half-space (such as a saline soil)." and "One advantage is that it gives more information about the target, and therefore it confers a greater discrimination capacity. For instance, two different targets may have the same one-component approximated time constant spectrum, but they have different two-component approximated time constant spectra. Therefore, using a two component approximated time constant spectrum may allow these two targets to he distinguished from each other." Date. Minelab Electronics Pty Limited patents. 02/11/16 Discrimination a metal detector 08/06/15 Signal processing technique for a metal detector 06/18/15 Metal detector 05/28/15 Metal detector 02/05/15 Method for detecting fast time constant targets using a metal detector 11/14/13 Support arrangement for an implement 10/24/13 Communication between a sensor and a processing unit of a metal detector 09/12/13 Method for displaying metal detection information 06/20/13 Transmit signal of a metal detector 06/13/13 Method for separating target signals from unwanted signals in a metal detector 03/07/13 Metal detector sensor head 06/14/12 Metal detector with at least one transmit/receive switch 09/29/11 Metal detector sensor head 11/11/10 Metal detector with improved magnetic response application 06/17/10 Rectangular-wave transmitting metal detector 06/17/10 Metal detector for salt soils 06/10/10 Constant current metal detector with driven transmit coil 12/24/09 Real-time rectangular-wave transmitting metal detector platform with user selectable transmission and reception properties 12/24/09 Multi-frequency transmitter for a metal detector 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klunker Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Nuts! They beat me to it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanursepaul Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 i just wrote klunker an amail how i had figured that out,,,,dang it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Herschbach Posted June 22, 2016 Author Share Posted June 22, 2016 There is no doubt Minelab files lots of patents. Since 2000 more than all the other players combined. They are given a lot of grief over how the patents are written and just how new some of them really are, but this is a part of the detecting game Minelab seems to have mastered. They not only come up with new methods, but have been very good the last twenty years at blocking progress at other companies by way of patents. The number one reason I heard from the competition over the years about why nobody made units that seriously competed with the Minelab PI detectors was.... patents. I actually am a bit surprised how few patents relating to basic detecting technology are filed by most of the competition these days, the only real exception being White's. First Texas has been active, but almost all relate to a walk through detector. Garrett has a new one for a waterproof housing design, but that's about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredmason Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 now if they could block all the fakers that would be fantastic...Minelab Rules! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick K - First Member Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 Here's a long thread from Geotech - consensus is that the patent os BS - everything in it has been previously disclosed by others previously. Dave Johnson's post is readable, many of the others require an EE to understand. http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?22971-Latest-Minelab-Patent-11th-Feb-2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Herschbach Posted June 22, 2016 Author Share Posted June 22, 2016 If that is the case the patent application will be rejected. Want to make a bet Rick? On reflection though I don't care enough to bet - just information for people to ponder is all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peteren Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 As long as the discrimination function comes as a firmware update and not another $10k machine 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klunker Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 But Petern- There is no profit in a firmware update. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peteren Posted June 24, 2016 Share Posted June 24, 2016 20 hours ago, klunker said: But Petern- There is no profit in a firmware update. Microsoft and Apple seem to do OK with this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now