Jump to content

Separation Testing: Artificial Vs Realistic Conditions

Recommended Posts

  • The title was changed to Separation Testing: Artificial Vs Realistic Conditions

31 minutes ago, ColonelDan said:

...you may have a different experience.

No , I have exactly the same experience  ... 🙂 

I found the air separation tests to be not reliable and I ve done lots of them ...

For example , a Vanquish is better than a Deus on an air separation test . In the field it is a completely different story and a Vanquish is much more difficult to use than a Deus in my local ( French ) iron trashed areas ..



  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I learned a long time ago, too:  know the assumptions.  The problem isn't with air tests per-se, but the (mis-)interpretation when the assumptions aren't taken into account.

Going further, it's fairly easy to do an in-ground test with a single target only (meaning no nearby good OR bad targets).  How do you do a test with even just two targets?  You can bury them but they stay forever separated (in all three directions -- left/right, forward/backward, up/down) by the same amount.  What happens in the field?  All those distances vary, and sometimes you get even more than two metallic objects within the coils zone of influence.

So, are test garden results worthless?

Air tests have their value.  Test garden investigation has its value.  If you expect those to tell you everything about what will happen in the field....  But to blanket throw those tests in the trashcan is also sub-optimal.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mostly do separation tests and tests like Monte’s nail board test with the targets either laying on top of basically target free ground in the wild or on top of iron mineralized ground test samples so that ground balance and recovery speed settings actually have some realistic bearing on the testing. That is the type of ground I find most of the older pre 1900 targets in and it gives me at least a starting place for settings that might work and some indication of audio and target ID anomalies that might happen.  Otherwise, air separation tests only tell me very basic information which may or may not transfer over to real life detecting conditions where I detect. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the separation test in the first row, you have to realize...what type of separation is involved....I divide separation into 3 types...

  ...The first type is a Flat 2D separation test - let's say a Monty performance nailboard type Test where the coin and the nails are placed in one plane... - and the places you meet are places like Ghost Town or even stones on the road ... where coins and keys and other iron are stored shallowly at approximately the same depth.

The tested detector must be able to handle 2D separation well...but often a smaller DD or concentric coil will help in this type of separation..the interesting thing is that the tested detector may not be good at 3D deep separation...-but it can be good at 2D separation..

The second type is the 2.5 D separation test, where the coin and the iron are on the surface from the side, but the coin is buried about 5-8 cm deeper... and at the deep ... level of the coin, additional iron can be deposited... In the field, you can very often encounter such a situation, mostly in the rocky terrain of a field or forest....but also in agricultural fields, which are often worn and in demand objects, but also iron in the ground, every time they modify their position, they often change their position...

In this test, the detector must handle the 2D separation well...but, among other things, it must also match the 3D separation well...to achieve good results in this test...coils of size 5-9" can prove themselves well in such a separation.

The 3rd type of separation is 3D depth separation where the coin is placed at a depth of 10,15,20. cm..and the iron is placed on the surface from the side or even several pieces of iron from several sides above the coin.. This is a typical ancient place where many lived civilizations and coins and iron are stored in different layers of the terrain ..... Only detectors with exceptional 3D depth separation will give really good results here... and such detectors can detect targets 15-20 or more cm deep .... between iron..
It may be a surprise that the best detection coils here are 9"-11"...

From my point of view, I do not underestimate any of these 3 types of separation test....and quite the opposite....if the tested detector successfully passes the 2D flat, 2.5D shallow and 3D deep separation test...then I consider this detector to be really successful. ..

...In real detection, the experience of testing that can optimize the detector setting for the best possible separation and correct sweeping with the coil ... will translate relatively quickly to good results in detection in such an environment..v. terrain heavily loaded with iron where good targets are still disguised...

In this video, I tested and detected with the detector on an old stone road... with a strongly set discrimination to + 26 so that I completely removed the aluminum foil signal... but still maintained excellent unmasking on very small silver hammered coins that give VDI 35-40...

Such a detector setting will allow you to fully concentrate on detecting the desired targets that have the right VDI targets....


IMG-20230904-WA0054 – kópia.jpeg


  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

  When less is better.  Would you take your detector and set the 1-10 sensitivity settings down to 2?  Then turn the discrimination settings up most the way?  I think we all want to set everything up to maximum, Get every last inch and everything including large iron.  Half the time the detector is overloading, seeing 3D clutter, nulling out, masking.  Be honest. 

 I'll be first to admit it. We then go for smaller coils, narrow the search area for the detector to work with. Separation, Recovery speed is the talk, Are we asking too much of the detector? 

  "Back when" I didn't know what I would call that.   I did go about it in a manual way,  County fair grounds, over a 100 years old.  Layer after layer of targets and trash.  I knew the good stuff was there, I just had to work for it. Pick an area and take the loud big targets one by one and dig them out, go back over it and take the next layer out and start getting the silver, Each layer I cleaned out got better finds. There's no detector on the markets today, or ever for that matter that could sort thru that mess and pick out the good stuff.  Less can be better. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...