field test unit no 001 "model T"

[Doug2]

I don't want to get embroiled in this "discussion", but I think it's worth pointing out that induction heating systems only have the power flowing in one direction. i.e. from the coil into the target. BUT ... in a PI detector, the eddy currents generated in the target will develop their own magnetic field (according to Lenz's Law) which then has to make the return journey to the receive coil. Sorry Moodz, but I tend to agree with deemon. There is no free lunch.

But is Moodz really measuring or even interested in the “return signal” ?

[moodz]

I don't want to get embroiled in this "discussion", but I think it's worth pointing out that induction heating systems only have the power flowing in one direction. i.e. from the coil into the target. BUT ... in a PI detector, the eddy currents generated in the target will develop their own magnetic field (according to Lenz's Law) which then has to make the return journey to the receive coil. Sorry Moodz, but I tend to agree with deemon. There is no free lunch.

...that's my point ...measuring the energy leaving the coil is easy if you know how ...and actually reject the return which will be x^6 weaker. I ate the lunch before it was packed :-) its straight physics.

[Paul99]

... I thought it would be clear by now that my device is not a classic PI ... so the only mistakes here are your assumptions. Your PALS are trying to extract patent information .... not very successfully so far.

Moodz, no one gives two hoots about your patents. Give it another 12 months and you will have let your current patents also lapse. You have been grandstanding and "sigh"ing to inflate your own ego, and it is about time you walked the walk and produced something of consequence instead of proposing how great you are while producing nothing. As validation for my statement, you claimed months ago on AEGPF that there were users already out there and using your detector design in the field. Stop the BS and cut to the chase, and prove you are not all BS.

EDIT: Considering all the grandstanding we have seen from you Moodz, and the claims you have made, it should not be difficult for you to demonstrate your detector in the field and therefore prove you are not full of excreta. The ball is in your court.

[Qiaozhi]

I don't want to get embroiled in this "discussion", but I think it's worth pointing out that induction heating systems only have the power flowing in one direction. i.e. from the coil into the target. BUT ... in a PI detector, the eddy currents generated in the target will develop their own magnetic field (according to Lenz's Law) which then has to make the return journey to the receive coil. Sorry Moodz, but I tend to agree with deemon. There is no free lunch.

[Doug2]

PS ... you better tell the guys working on wireless induction power transfer systems about the 6th power law because according to your logic it cant work but then again you are taking your advice from people who majored in pure and applied moronics.

There are a number of papers in the scientific literature on wireless induction power transfer systems that validate your approach!

[WM6]

Regretfully, all this wrestling here, is only a boast, who has the longest Duck.

But none is dare show it in action.

Tons of theory, simulations, screen-shots and equations, years after years, without any proven real and working outcome.

For basic metal detector theory it is enough, for most of us, to read this paper (and I am not BC/ML fan):

http://www.minelab.com/__files/f/11043

Leaves open the possibility, that all wrestler here has the world longest Duck, but I'll believe it, when I see it in real action.

[moodz]

Hmm , what about schematics , Moods , we all must clearly understand the very important point - among two things , physics and electronics , physics has higher priority . So , if we understand the principle - we don't need to see the circuit , the principle is enough . For example , in my topic I already gave all necessary information to make my device , for every well-qualified electronic engineer . Of course , I will draw and post all schematics too .... but the main problem is that this topic isn't my permanent occupation , so I need to find a time to do it .

But this topic is about your device , not mine ( and I gave the link only because some theory that my topic contains , in order not to repeat the same things in another words ) . And what about your idea - if you say that you decided to ignore all eddy currents decay signal ( interval C ) , it's quite enough to predict the properties of your possible device ... and if you claim that your method can override the 6-th power law ( forward and back field propagation ) - it's quite enough to detect a mistake in the entire principle In another words , when you hope to get a 1000 times more sensitivity due to utilize this "instant reaction target signal" ( X-component ) , that classic PI don't use - this is a MISTAKE , because this signal cannot be 1000 times stronger with a real metal target , anyhow .

... I thought it would be clear by now that my device is not a classic PI ... so the only mistakes here are your assumptions. Your PALS are trying to extract patent information .... not very successfully so far.

[deemon]

Hmm , what about schematics , Moods , we all must clearly understand the very important point - among two things , physics and electronics , physics has higher priority . So , if we understand the principle - we don't need to see the circuit , the principle is enough . For example , in my topic I already gave all necessary information to make my device , for every well-qualified electronic engineer . Of course , I will draw and post all schematics too .... but the main problem is that this topic isn't my permanent occupation , so I need to find a time to do it .

But this topic is about your device , not mine ( and I gave the link only because some theory that my topic contains , in order not to repeat the same things in another words ) . And what about your idea - if you say that you decided to ignore all eddy currents decay signal ( interval C ) , it's quite enough to predict the properties of your possible device ... and if you claim that your method can override the 6-th power law ( forward and back field propagation ) - it's quite enough to detect a mistake in the entire principle In another words , when you hope to get a 1000 times more sensitivity due to utilize this "instant reaction target signal" ( X-component ) , that classic PI don't use - this is a MISTAKE , because this signal cannot be 1000 times stronger with a real metal target , anyhow .

[Aziz]

Making Big Big Outrages Claims Now *LOL*

The "Ultimate Thermo-Nuclear Melt-Down"(c)(r)(tm) is coming... NO BULLS...! *LOL*

I haven't pressed any "thermo-nuclear red buttons"(c)(r)(tm) yet. But the share price is going down..

http://au.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=CDA.AX

I think Garrett has caused this. Bad bad boys!
Aziz

[moodz]

Of course , I can copy it here ... the only problem is this fantastic captcha on AEGPF forum



It's a pity , Moods , but you have a mistake here ... You see , all this "energy exchange" between the coil and the target occurs via the same magnetic field , being reduced with the distance by the same 6-th power law . So we cannot "cheat" the nature and get some additional gain . What we really have from the target is two kinds of the signal - one signal is a "momentary" target reaction ( also called "X-component" ) , and a "delayed reaction" ( also called "R-component") . Classic PI detector does receive only R component and ignores X , and this is why it has all its properties - good ground tolerance and absence of ferro-discrimination . But when you begin to measure the signal during your A and B periods - you will capture this X-component too .... and of course , this signal cannot be 1000 times stronger than that you had measured before in your PI - if it would , than every IB detector ( that utilizes X signal by its principle ) will kill every PI machine 1000 times too - but we don't see it , anyhow . And it doesn't depend on the coil damping method , because the main process ( eddy current start and decay ) occures in the target , very loosely coupled to the coil .

But what you will get if you do this ( completely ignore this eddy current signal in a C period ) ? Of course , you will get a detector that in some situations can be more sensitive than a classic PI machine .... but this difference cannot be high , and another problem - you'll loose the "ground tolerance" ( ground balance ) of your device , because the best sensitivity it will have only to a ferrite target - that gives the most strong X-signal . Another kind of targets that this circuit would feel well is a superconductor target , being the "ideal opponent" to a ferrite ... but we cannot meet it in a real situation , of course . So , if we want to make a perfect wideband detector , we must use all signal energy that the target does return , converting our device to the kind of "optimal receiver".... of course , it's too long to explain now , but once I wrote it on the page 3 of this Geotech topic - http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...nduction/page3 - I explained there the main difference in signal processing between IB and PI machines , and also explained how to use all their advantages simultaneously ...

Deemon .... I am amazed that you must be very concerned about this subject to post the same post in two forums ...
and further in wonderment how without even seeing a circuit you can make such determinations regarding how it works ...
and you reference your own work complete with screenshots ( But NO circuit ) which is completely different from my method from what I can see but apparently excellent for detecting large aluminium blocks.


PS ... you better tell the guys working on wireless induction power transfer systems about the 6th power law because according to your logic it cant work [snipped by Admin]

[Doug2]

Of course , I can copy it here ... the only problem is this fantastic captcha on AEGPF forum



It's a pity , Moods , but you have a mistake here ... You see , all this "energy exchange" between the coil and the target occurs via the same magnetic field , being reduced with the distance by the same 6-th power law . So we cannot "cheat" the nature and get some additional gain . What we really have from the target is two kinds of the signal - one signal is a "momentary" target reaction ( also called "X-component" ) , and a "delayed reaction" ( also called "R-component") . Classic PI detector does receive only R component and ignores X , and this is why it has all its properties - good ground tolerance and absence of ferro-discrimination . But when you begin to measure the signal during your A and B periods - you will capture this X-component too .... and of course , this signal cannot be 1000 times stronger than that you had measured before in your PI - if it would , than every IB detector ( that utilizes X signal by its principle ) will kill every PI machine 1000 times too - but we don't see it , anyhow . And it doesn't depend on the coil damping method , because the main process ( eddy current start and decay ) occures in the target , very loosely coupled to the coil .

But what you will get if you do this ( completely ignore this eddy current signal in a C period ) ? Of course , you will get a detector that in some situations can be more sensitive than a classic PI machine .... but this difference cannot be high , and another problem - you'll loose the "ground tolerance" ( ground balance ) of your device , because the best sensitivity it will have only to a ferrite target - that gives the most strong X-signal . Another kind of targets that this circuit would feel well is a superconductor target , being the "ideal opponent" to a ferrite ... but we cannot meet it in a real situation , of course . So , if we want to make a perfect wideband detector , we must use all signal energy that the target does return , converting our device to the kind of "optimal receiver".... of course , it's too long to explain now , but once I wrote it on the page 3 of this Geotech topic - http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...nduction/page3 - I explained there the main difference in signal processing between IB and PI machines , and also explained how to use all their advantages simultaneously ...

Deemon,
Do you have the complete schematic of the Moodz detector so that we can all analyse it and thus test the validity or otherwise of your assumptions about it?

[deemon]

Of course , I can copy it here ... the only problem is this fantastic captcha on AEGPF forum

HOWEVER ... there is a complicating factor .... if a target is a distance X from the coil the eddy currents stimulated in the target during period A and B will be reduced by a factor of 1/XxXxX or one over X cubed. Call this the transmit path loss. During period C the same rule applies there will be a further path loss of 1/XxXxX as the standard PI detector tries to detect a target eddy current during period C. In other words the TX loss multiplied by the RX loss is 1/XxXxXxXxXxX or one over X to sixth power. All of this because the standard detector measures the target "return" signal during period C. This maths has been simplified the real maths still demonstrates the advantage.

The moodz detector does not measure the target return during period C ... there is very little decay curve to sample in period C because the active damping control loop of the moodz detector minimises this "error" voltage. The moodz detector effectively estimates the energy stored in the target ( ie the eddy current ) during transmit by subtracting the energy returned during flyback ( period B ) from the energy transmitted ( period A ) ie instead of measuring C we measure B - A This is just like alegbra :-) ..... except here is the killer ...... by measuring B - A instead of C the path loss to the target is only 1 / XxXxX for the moodz detector instead of 1 / XxXxXxXxXxX for your standard PI detectors. Thusly the moodz detector is 3 orders of magnitude more sensitive than your BrandX detector.

It's a pity , Moods , but you have a mistake here ... You see , all this "energy exchange" between the coil and the target occurs via the same magnetic field , being reduced with the distance by the same 6-th power law . So we cannot "cheat" the nature and get some additional gain . What we really have from the target is two kinds of the signal - one signal is a "momentary" target reaction ( also called "X-component" ) , and a "delayed reaction" ( also called "R-component") . Classic PI detector does receive only R component and ignores X , and this is why it has all its properties - good ground tolerance and absence of ferro-discrimination . But when you begin to measure the signal during your A and B periods - you will capture this X-component too .... and of course , this signal cannot be 1000 times stronger than that you had measured before in your PI - if it would , than every IB detector ( that utilizes X signal by its principle ) will kill every PI machine 1000 times too - but we don't see it , anyhow . And it doesn't depend on the coil damping method , because the main process ( eddy current start and decay ) occures in the target , very loosely coupled to the coil .

But what you will get if you do this ( completely ignore this eddy current signal in a C period ) ? Of course , you will get a detector that in some situations can be more sensitive than a classic PI machine .... but this difference cannot be high , and another problem - you'll loose the "ground tolerance" ( ground balance ) of your device , because the best sensitivity it will have only to a ferrite target - that gives the most strong X-signal . Another kind of targets that this circuit would feel well is a superconductor target , being the "ideal opponent" to a ferrite ... but we cannot meet it in a real situation , of course . So , if we want to make a perfect wideband detector , we must use all signal energy that the target does return , converting our device to the kind of "optimal receiver".... of course , it's too long to explain now , but once I wrote it on the page 3 of this Geotech topic - http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...nduction/page3 - I explained there the main difference in signal processing between IB and PI machines , and also explained how to use all their advantages simultaneously ...

[Paul99]

Deemon, why don't you post here the post you posted to AEGPF earlier.

This one...
http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...1528/#msg31528

Deemon, your brilliant post should definitely be posted here on Geotech for all members. You are one of the few people who understands PI basics, and members would learn a lot by reading your post.

[Paul99]

And what about this topic - this idea does have a mistake in its principle , it's a pity
We cannot discard this 6-th power law , anyhow ...

Deemon, why don't you post here the post you posted to AEGPF earlier.

This one...

http://australianelectronicgoldprospectingforum.com/general-chat-and-discussion-forum/why-the-moodz-detetector-is-better/msg31528/#msg31528

[deemon]

And what about this topic - this idea does have a mistake in its principle , it's a pity
We cannot discard this 6-th power law , anyhow ...