looking for home-made G.P.R.

[gwzd]

http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geograp...thodology.html





.

Do you understand what "service provider" means? Do you understand that most service providers that do not deliver proper results go into bankruptcy very fast? Do you understand that Mr. Doolittle is a geophysicist and many service providers are not? Do you realize that soils and geological surveys are the smallest fragment of the GPR market? Do you understand that checking an area for GPR suitability is a fairly easy task and doesn't involve utterly complex procedures?
If all your answers are affirmative, then I don't know where do you want to get with all this? I'm a little bit lost in here, pasting quotations without any comments is useless. I can for instance show the results of an antenna surveying a lake in Croatia, see the attached picture. This company was searching in a lake for pieces of "black oak" which is much more valuable than many of the "treasures" many people find and it doesn't affect the national cultural heritage. The lake was heavily contaminated with peat coal residues and clay. It doesn't take a geophysicist to understand that a survey here is impossible. So, please, explain your point or at least explain your quotes, because otherwise they doesn't deserve an answer and an intelligent dialogue is out of the question.
Regards,
RA

[gwzd]

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=106385



.

And your point is?
Regards,
RA

[Valchev]

Most GPR service providers have limited knowledge of soils and are unable to foretell attenuation rates, penetration depths, and the general suitability of the soils within project areas to GPR.

http://soils.usda.gov/survey/geograp...thodology.html





.

[Valchev]

Treasure Hunting Paradise

Treasure Hunting Paradise. Or Hell

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=106385



.

[gwzd]

UWB GPR is the highest technology.
Electrical conductivity around 0.1 mS is very good , but you can see any map of soil conductivity that usualy it is very more, in fact yous example is in ideal condition, real condition are very different.

I do agree with you that in Scandinavia we have very good conditions for gpr. It doesn't mean they are not real as you said, it means we've got good conditions, no wonder why we have so many people doing this technology here.

In my place the ground conductivity is 15mS/m , what will be the depth ?

15ms/m is still very good and your results should be quite nice. The penetration depth is a function of many factors, all of them stated in the radar equation. If you know the power delivered to your antenna, the efficiency of it, the directivity then you can very accurately calculate the penetration with your specific equipment and your antennas. We provide to our customers very accurate data on the equipment we sell and most of the time a sales representative has the equipment in situ to show how well it might or might not suit your purposes. We do not sell "pigs in a bag" as we say in Swedish, but proven merchandise. That's why we need sales reps in those countries with demand for our equipment.

Of cors it is right. I never wrote enyting different,

I understood that because you said my example was bad since it didn't show "treasures", but rebars and pipes.

but so long is object so deeply a GPR can to locate it.

I didn't understand what you meant, cylindrical targets perhaps?

Pipe and rebars are best metal objects for GPR,

Two of the pipes in my example are not metal, and that's on purpose to show our trainees the difference, but as you can see they were detected without any problems. I have a customer in Ohio that searches for gems with our radar, it is not metal neither, but it is definitely a treasure.

but in treasure hunting usually objects are not so long.

why not? A sword with diamonds in the handle? a medieval chalice? An Inca golden wand? A nazi chest in Greece? Shall I continue?

My questions was:
1. Can you show eny examples, yours or eny other in the net , where i can see examples in real soil (not sand and rock) with soil electrical conductivity more than 1mS/m better more than 5mS/m because most of soils have EC more than 5mS/m ?

Absolutely, I hope you don't mean gpr works only in Sweden. Follow this link to the datasheet of one of our antennas, on page 3 and 4 you can see examples taken in Paris where the conductivity of the soil is notoriously high, much higher than in your area:
http://www.geoscanners.com/pdf/DS_FLB-390.pdf

2. Can you show eny examples, yours or eny other in the net , where i can see examples of detecting objects, without pipe and rebars, with ahtenna
1GHz or more ?

Absolutely, see the attached picture of a section of a road in Italy, taken with our MA1000, 1GHz ground coupled antenna. It shows the asphalt layer deterioration, the sub-bottom of the road, the digging of a trench and a sewage pipe. Pretty impressive for such a conductive area such as northern Italy, Ah?! I have many examples with all our antennas, some with GSSI that we have worked at lot with, some Mala Geoscience and even a couple of Sensors and Software, although we do not own a radar of the latest.

My questions are not to discredit you or technology GPR,

No worries, that is out of your reach. By now GPR is a well proven technique in all areas around the world and our company has a solid reputation to deliver top of the line products.

my questions are with goal to i read something interesting and useful for me self.

I understood that Valchev, that's why I'm inviting you to come and visit us, no worry, I won't charge you by the hour
It'll be my pleasure to show you around and our equipment and answer all the questions you might have. We are not so greedy as we seem at first sight!
My regards,
RA

[Valchev]

UWB GPR is the highest technology.
Electrical conductivity around 0.1 mS is very good , but you can see any map of soil conductivity that usualy it is very more, in fact yous example is in ideal condition, real condition are very different. In my place the ground conductivity is 15mS/m , what will be the depth ?

metal plates, rebars, bolts and nuts, soda can, all of these are generic responses and you cannot define gold or any other noble metal from others with gpr, there is no discrimination. Bottom line, an anomaly with a rebar and an anomaly with a golden bar would look the same

Of cors it is right. I never wrote enyting different, but so long is object so deeply a GPR can to locate it. Pipe and rebars are best metal objects for GPR, but in treasure hunting usually objects are not so long.

My questions was:
1. Can you show eny examples, yours or eny other in the net , where i can see examples in real soil (not sand and rock) with soil electrical conductivity more than 1mS/m better more than 5mS/m because most of soils have EC more than 5mS/m ?

2. Can you show eny examples, yours or eny other in the net , where i can see examples of detecting objects, without pipe and rebars, with ahtenna
1GHz or more ?

My questions are not to discredit you or technology GPR, my questions are with goal to i read something interesting and useful for me self.

[gwzd]

Hi gwzd,

If i do not make mistake you think that i am against you. May be the reason is my poor english. My questions was only to i learn the answers.

Yes, that might be the reason, but your answer was definitely a bit hostile.
I just wanted to help you in your project. This forum has a great deal of good will and I just pointed out areas where you could improve.

Yes have a treasure hunters that use GHz antennas. I can not to explain , because some treasure hunters do not like somebody as me to explain their job.

Oh, I see.

Your first example is not enough because:



What is conductivity of the ground in you first example?

Really? I think you didn't understand the sentence you are quoting. What I wrote was that: you should not say gpr is not good until you prove it is.
I my particular case with the data I presented I didn't need any prove. You can see it yourself, it works perfectly! None the less, if you want the conductivity here it goes: the electrical conductivity in most parts of Norrbotten where we live is around 0.1 mS, but considering this is an area with grass on top of it and fertilizers are used then one could assume somewhat higher conductivity in the top layers. I however, must say this is absolutely irrelevant here because we can see the penetration is good.

You second example is good for normal workers, but it have any data for treasure hunters,

And the difference would be? you use metal plates, pretty large ones for a 1.6GHz antenna I must say, is your example for treasure hunters or not? what would be the case of a treasure hunter searching for a flat metal plate like yours? I'm sorry, but you are wrong, metal plates, rebars, bolts and nuts, soda can, all of these are generic responses and you cannot define gold or any other noble metal from others with gpr, there is no discrimination. Bottom line, an anomaly with a rebar and an anomaly with a golden bar would look the same, therefore your comment is incorrect. People searching rebars or cavities would see the same as people searching for jewlery and hidden caves. Sorry, but you do not understand the underlying principle of GPR applications.

but if i do not make mistake this is a forum for treasure hunting equipment.

Wrong again, this forum is geophysics in the category technology in a technology for treasure hunting forum, there is no ban for talking about other stuff. Besides, as explained earlier, there is no difference between one anomaly and the other, our customers in Greece and Mexico know that for sure.

May be yous examples a the best for normal workers, but in treasure hunting the main is depth , object , soil ,

what would be in your opinion the main issues for non treasure hunters? I'm afraid that you will discover that every GPR user is concerned with the same and therefore no difference can be drawn.

and usually treasure hunters do not looking for pipe and rebars.

Well, I think you've got it by now, but just in case: there is no difference.
Please, do not try to obfuscate this technology, it is not extraterrestrial, it is a tool like any other. More and more people are realizing that and you see the usage of GPR spreading all over the world. All the statements of the kind "you are so stupid for gpr" are thankfully disappearing and anyone with a little bit of interest for technology and an open mind to learn can use GPR. Don't think so? Then book a training course with us, we will show you we are right, money back guarantee!
My best regards,
RA

[Valchev]

Hi gwzd,

If i do not make mistake you think that i am against you. May be the reason is my poor english. My questions was only to i learn the answers.

what possibly a treasure hunter would search with a 1.6GHz antenna

Yes have a treasure hunters that use GHz antennas. I can not to explain , because some treasure hunters do not like somebody as me to explain their job.

Your first example is not enough because:

The point is that you should check the conductivity of the ground before you rule out GPR.

What is conductivity of the ground in you first example?

You second example is good for normal workers, but it have any data for treasure hunters, but if i do not make mistake this is a forum for treasure hunting equipment.

May be yous examples a the best for normal workers, but in treasure hunting the main is depth , object , soil , and usually treasure hunters do not looking for pipe and rebars.

regards

[gwzd]

Oh, I forgot one thing in the previous post to make things crystal clear,
the data in the pictures was exported directly into jpg with our own software
GPRSoft PRO that can be found here:
http://www.geoscanners.com/gprsoft.htm
Just to be clear
A free copy is available for all major gpr data formats, so, you see we also share
Regards,
RA

[gwzd]

Hi gwzd,

The vertical it is equivalent to 1m.

With a 1.6GHz? I think not, sorry, but that is unreal.

Treasure hunters are not scientists, the picture must to be clear,

On the contrary, the less a person knows about this technology the clearer the data ought to be. Besides, what possibly a treasure hunter would search with a 1.6GHz antenna?

due to this my software do not show horizontal continuous layers, show only changes in layers and local anomaly.

All gpr units show anomalies, my gpr units show only what is in the material nothing more, nothing less.

I am new in high frequency GPR technology

My mistake, I thought otherwise.

, if you know a examples similar to my or better

Absolutely!

, if possible share the links, but not advertisement

I have never misplaced advertisements in this forum, only in the sections where it is allowed. I have a place for my advertisements and some other useful information here:
http://www.gpr-forum.com

, only technical data, as Bill512 wrote in his post 16:

http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...=101749#post10
1749

I'll try to be as clear as possible.
The first picture shows our antenna GCB-300, 300MHz center frequency ground coupled antenna detecting several pipes and conduits buried at 0.3, 0.5 and 0.6 respectively. The sharp one is a metal one, the one next to it is a plastic one filled with water and the one alone is a plastic one filled with air. The soil type is a mixture of sand, gravel and the grass with organic soil at the top. This pipes have been buried there for more than 6 years now and therefore you cannot see the disturbed soil, it has had time to compact again.
The second picture shows our MA1500, 1.5GHz center frequency ground coupled antenna detecting the rebar mesh of a concrete slab, you can also see the bottom of the slab. The rebars are standard 8mm ones placed 200mm from one another. The start of the trace has been offset to clearly see the start of of the surface and better assess the depth to each individual rebar. The material is obviously concrete, and it is laying directly on the floor, that can be seen clearly.

I hope this is as specific as you wanted it to be. The data has to be clear, like in my examples for instance or any other commercially available GPR for that matter. Saying that fuzzy data with no scales is good for treasure hunter is diminishing them. The majority of my customers are not scientists, but normal workers searching for water pipes, cables, plastic conduits, voids in the secondary lining of tunnels, railway ballasts etc.
Giving them good clear data with our radar units and our antennas is of paramount importance for us, then again we are in it not for the hobby and for the bucks, of course.
I wish you luck with your unit and trust me when I say, I just wanted to help. Help not needed, I got it.
Regards,
RA

[Valchev]

Oh, another thing,
Are you using bluetooth to transfer the data?
I didn't notice any cable from the antenna to the laptop.
If that's so, does it work reliably? I mean, 1.6GHz antenna will most certainly go up minimum to 3.0GHz disrupting the 2.4GHz band.
Interesting, very interesting.
Regards,
RA

The USB cable is behind concrete blocks.

[Valchev]

Hi Valchev,
what is the vertical scale of the radargram?
If you apply a little bit of stacking your SNR will improve considerably.
I cannot see the air gap between the two concrete blocks, neither can I the concrete/air interface on the blocks supports. You could apply a little bit of R2R gain to improve that area as well.
Could you post how the signal looks like in o-scope mode with the proper scale? I have seen your software can do that.
Keep the good work!
Regards,
RA

Hi gwzd,

The vertical it is equivalent to 1m. Treasure hunters are not scientists, the picture must to be clear, due to this my software do not show horizontal continuous layers, show only changes in layers and local anomaly.
I am new in high frequency GPR technology, if you know a examples similar to my or better , if possible share the links, but not advertisement , only technical data, as Bill512 wrote in his post 16:

http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...=101749#post10
1749

give us an example ,soil type,anomaly type and size(metal or void) and the depth of detection.

Examples similar to my with technical data will be very interesting to me, and may be not only for me.
Thanks in advance.

Regards

[gwzd]

Oh, another thing,
Are you using bluetooth to transfer the data?
I didn't notice any cable from the antenna to the laptop.
If that's so, does it work reliably? I mean, 1.6GHz antenna will most certainly go up minimum to 3.0GHz disrupting the 2.4GHz band.
Interesting, very interesting.
Regards,
RA

[gwzd]

The new home made high frequency ground penetrating radar with antenna 1.6 GHz .

Examples and video: http://hfgpr.hit.bg/

Hi Valchev,
what is the vertical scale of the radargram?
If you apply a little bit of stacking your SNR will improve considerably.
I cannot see the air gap between the two concrete blocks, neither can I the concrete/air interface on the blocks supports. You could apply a little bit of R2R gain to improve that area as well.
Could you post how the signal looks like in o-scope mode with the proper scale? I have seen your software can do that.
Keep the good work!
Regards,
RA

[Valchev]

The new home made high frequency ground penetrating radar with antenna 1.6 GHz .

Examples and video: http://hfgpr.hit.bg/