Pulse Induction & VLF In One Detector. Don't Piss On My Dream.

[Gerry in Idaho]

5 hours ago, dig4gold said:

Hang on Gerry. Your question was about COMBINING VLF & PI into one detector. My comment was that Not from Minelab you won't because they would rather sell you two separate individual detectors to make more money out of you.

To the best of my knowledge a Nox 800/900 & Manticore are VLF. Nothing to do with PI. So nothing to do with combining VLF & PI. Could ML do it? Possibly very likely. If they could, why haven't they already?

Maybe now that you have thrown it out there it may stir things up. Maybe someone else will beat them to it.

D4G  

Fair enough my friend.  Hey, I like seeing open communication and expressing our thoughts/desires.  Even though I may not always agree with an occasional comment, at least we're discussing.  All is good.

[Hobo]

,😂 why not incorporate a LRD also?  LOL.

[dig4gold]

7 hours ago, Gerry in Idaho said:

Fair enough my friend.  Hey, I like seeing open communication and expressing our thoughts/desires.  Even though I may not always agree with an occasional comment, at least we're discussing.  All is good.

Hey Gerry. I based my comment losely on Minelabs business model of Mining the miners. The future will tell with a combined VLF/PI. Maybe we have the best of both of those already in individual detectors. The direction these days seems to be detectors getting smaller tiny gold at better depths than previously. The fact I think will always remain that no one detector is going to do it all. Still going to need more that one detector & coil combos to cover more bases.

D4G 

[Erik Oostra]

On 5/2/2024 at 1:52 AM, Gerry in Idaho said:

After all, it's just a dream...until it becomes reality.

Here's my dream.. it still hasn't become a reality.. ❌Wave  

 

[Norvic]

Crikey missed that thread, pissin on ya dream Gerry, Erik Gwave Pty Ltd has ya covered...

[Skookum]

I was drawn in by the VLF/PI combo topic.  However, I’m also hopeful about AI. I agree that we are still at a point where AI learning on the machine is not viable. However, I can’t wait to see machine learning seriously applied to metal detector signal processing. As an example, not long ago, a radar detector start up company began applying machine learning to analyzing radar signals. The computers discovered previously unseen patterns in various transmitted signals that allowed them to begin identifying and naming the devices transmitting the signals. They shelved their consumer product ambitions and the rumors point to their discoveries leading to a government defense contract. Of course it’s not the same technology here. But, the method gives an example of what some powerful machine learning might add to metal detector signal analysis. Until then, bring on the combo PI/VLF!

[Quick]

I think a detector that doesn’t see the small ferrous metal would be more to my liking than one with a discriminator. I’ve noticed with the GPX 5000 in the fine gold timing, at times will balance out rotten rusty nails and metal can pieces, seeing it as ground mineralization. Cut out the small iron so I don’t have to hear it and I’m good.

The larger iron is easy enough to dig and the non ferrous targets are small in number and at times valuable. These need to come out of the ground anyway due to the possibility of them masking gold. 

[Chet]

On 5/2/2024 at 3:30 PM, Geotech said:

Not only that, but on the bench you can swing targets and get nice looking responses. But then you put the coil to the ground, and it's just a mess. I've seen engineers who thought they had designed a great detector, and when they get it in the field they just start crying.

Perhaps this is one that only works well on the bench;
 

 

[Geotech]

29 minutes ago, Chet said:

Perhaps this is one that only works well on the bench;

Paul's concepts are pretty solid. I'm currently working on a similar project.

[Gerry in Idaho]

17 hours ago, Chet said:

Perhaps this is one that only works well on the bench;
 

 

I'm no Engineer Chet and you certainly understand it better than I. Seeing it on a bench gets me excited as I would think all detectors start out on the bench.  Now you could be right, it only shows good results on the bench?  At least we know there are folks working on it and trying to get us "more detector options of the future".