SBG- slow motion metal detector

[ivconic]

In the meantime, I will prepare the "placement" file.
I am the main culprit for the inconsistencies in the numbering of the components... so it is my "punishment" to prepare that file for you.
Give me a day or two...

[GeoMax]

Here's what Sasho's slow motion prototype pcb looks like, it's a pcb I'll never make public, Sasho himself is entitled to one or two.
It is currently in the process of verification and testing.
The rest of the forum can now thank you warmly because they will never get a layout of this pcb!
Because of your "most".
What are we going to do now?
Go back to the mouse hole you crawled out of boy!

Hello ivconic,

At first glance, the PCB makes a good impression. On closer inspection, however, I—as a customer—would not be at all satisfied with it. Why? Just take a look at the component layout. The silkscreen looks terrible. The component designators are oriented sometimes to the right, sometimes to the left, and sometimes upside down. There is absolutely no system to it. Furthermore, test points are missing from key component groups. Additionally, the silkscreen is positioned too close to the pads. Regarding the ICs, there is no consistent orientation either, which complicates the component placement (Pick & Place) process. In several areas (U3, U4, U5), soldering in sockets would be difficult. However, I think the PCB will be good enough for testing purposes. Besides, one shouldn't complain when receiving something for free.

[algan]

Hi, Sasho, have you done a test in the ground and how deep will it detect? Any examples with coins? Thanks.

[scs-bg]

I don't do the sport of "Waving coins in front of a coil". I don't participate in this circus for the naive. I can make a video in which a detector detects a coin in the air at 40 centimeters. In real use, it will never detect it. A lot depends on the soil. There are cases when an expensive detector does not react to a small coin on the surface.

[ivconic]

Hello ivconic,

At first glance, the PCB makes a good impression. On closer inspection, however, I—as a customer—would not be at all satisfied with it. Why? Just take a look at the component layout. The silkscreen looks terrible. The component designators are oriented sometimes to the right, sometimes to the left, and sometimes upside down. There is absolutely no system to it. Furthermore, test points are missing from key component groups. Additionally, the silkscreen is positioned too close to the pads. Regarding the ICs, there is no consistent orientation either, which complicates the component placement (Pick & Place) process. In several areas (U3, U4, U5), soldering in sockets would be difficult. However, I think the PCB will be good enough for testing purposes. Besides, one shouldn't complain when receiving something for free.

"...however, I—as a customer..."

You and anyone else will never become a "customer"; for the simple reason that I will not offer these pcbs for sale.
I will only make 1 single detector for my personal use and fun.
Though, many objections are "fine" and I agree.
However, this is a through-hole board and not an smd, primarily intended for manual DIY hobby soldering.
A serious limiting factor for some objections is the predetermined small dimension of the pcb.
Page 2, post #29, I provided pictures of the box I plan to pack the pcb in.
There are 4 screw holes on the bottom of the box. It is the space that defined the dimensions of the pcb.
The schematic is not simple, there are a lot of components, plus decoupling capacitors have been added, which are not on the schematic.
...
"... test points are missing from key component groups..."

Yeah I agree, a few TPs in key spots would have been really useful, there just wasn't room.
...
"...the silkscreen is positioned too close to the pads..."

This is, to put it direct: a total ignorance and inexprerience.
JLPCB gerber viewer shows it like that, in reality the situation is much better.
I've done thousands of pcbs with JLPcb so far and I know for sure that the real pcb is different from what you see in their viewer, in a positive way.
...
"...Regarding the ICs, there is no consistent orientation either, which complicates the component placement (Pick & Place) process.
In several areas (U3, U4, U5), soldering in sockets would be difficult..."

Who on Earth will use pick'n place on this through-hole hobby diy pcb!??
Total nonsense.
Just to add more stupid "arguments" to the whole post, right?
This is already excessively "strict" reasoning.
If it was SMD, I would agree.
But in the case of through-hole; these objections are meaningless.
Except maybe the part where you correctly noted that a pair of DIL sockets will be really problematic to wedge.
Whoever made Pulse Star 2... had more difficult tasks!
I even had to choose some modified "2.5mm" (a bit more, about 3mm) footprint for the resistors, something I've always avoided until now, always preferring horizontal 7.5mm footprints.
The main factor is too little space and too many components.
The main thing for me is that the detector works well for me.
I only intend to make one, for my hobby. This is not a pcb for professional mass production.
Of course, you always have all the freedom in the world to design the pcb that suits you best.
You should keep in mind that the metal detector is a "field thing" and that it is preferable to pack it all in the smallest possible box, at least that's my preference.
The big fancy "square meter" pcbs we've often seen on this forum are only really good for educational purposes and bench testing.
Ok, let's be fair, some of your objections are acceptable, all my "justifications" are even more fine.
We will agree that we are both right to some extent.
Beauty is in the choice.
Draw your "correct" pcb and I'll salute it!
...
However, your post has nothing to do with constructive criticism. I've been on this forum for too long and I'm no stranger to the human forum mentality.

[ivconic]

I don't do the sport of "Waving coins in front of a coil". I don't participate in this circus for the naive. I can make a video in which a detector detects a coin in the air at 40 centimeters. In real use, it will never detect it. A lot depends on the soil. There are cases when an expensive detector does not react to a small coin on the surface.

These comments clearly show someone who truly understands the issue of metal detectors.
That's why I follow everything Sasho rarely publishes, because it's mostly interesting stuff.
For years, I've been making fun of the unprecedented YouTube "successes" of various characters.
About 20 years ago I posted a video of my TGSL with the addition of a small "piggy pcb" board.
That video shows how TGSL detects a 1 euro coin over 60cm in the air! Ha, ha, ha, ha!
And that's when I immediately decided to end such a YouTube career. Because it is totally meaningless.
I will always fondly remember the detector Atlatnis Imperator (or something like that) that detected coins in the air at 60-80cm!!!
I had 2 of these on test.
That was totally useless sh.. that wasn't even worth 5 euros!

[ivconic]

Based on some of the comments and "criticisms", I am sometimes genuinely surprised with the ignorance of most people on this forum!?
With metal detectors as with most electronics; the worst enemy of performance is a poor S/N ratio.
When trying to design a good pcb; the correct geometry and aesthetics of the positioning of the components is of less importance, but the pursuit of the best possible S/N ratio dictates everything!
Drawing a good pcb is not the goal of setting up in art galleries, but practically necessary and strict rules that are impossible to bypass in the task of achieving performance, in this case I first mean S/N.
The reason for many failed attempts on this forum, over the years; lies precisely in this problem.
No one was born learned.
Beginners should not be blamed for their ignorance and mistakes.
But when such a person dares to come out and publicly criticize something that he clearly does not know; then it all becomes very funny!
The smart ones will learn from such examples, the hopelessly stupid ones will continue to criticize other people's works ... and their own works... they simply don't have any!
Hey admins! How about this kinda harsh forum rant? Long time not seen...!
Oye, oye!
Sometimes I miss the good old days of heavy spitting and temporary forum bans!
I consider Carl a friend... but that friend of mine temporarily banned me from the forum the most times in the history of the internet!
I'm not complaining, I deserved it!

[ivconic]

[ivconic]

[Detectorist#1]

Hi ivconic and scs-bg,
You are right! "Waving coins in front of the coil" is most wide popular useless presentation of the capabilities of the MD. See presentations of "Pirate" MD with only two integral circuits. With static coil and some settings this detector is capable to react to medium size coin from 25cm and to make Fe/non-Fe discrimination (for bigger targets). Opposite test - waving of the coil over the coin - gives totally different results! But, as ivconic say - every MD enthusiast have to pass this stage. The detector without EFE cancelation, Ground Balance feature and serious Fe/non-Fe discrimination is completely useless in the real practice.

[ivconic]

Playing with AI cartoons brings me more fun than detectors!
I'm afraid the AI has taken my soul!

[scs-bg]

I think this forum is a place for smart and educated people. I have also been insulted here by people with complexes. This was the reason I did not participate for several years. This forum is for helping each other without conflicts.

[scs-bg]

Nobody got rich from making detectors. Me neither. The big manufacturers are the exception. It's a dying hobby. The problem is that there's nothing to find with a detector anymore. Even on the beach, people don't lose coins anymore because they don't carry money, but cards...

[GeoMax]

[Q UOTE=ivconic;n448460]

"...however, I—as a customer..."

You and anyone else will never become a "customer"; for the simple reason that I will not offer these pcbs for sale.
I will only make 1 single detector for my personal use and fun.
Though, many objections are "fine" and I agree.
However, this is a through-hole board and not an smd, primarily intended for manual DIY hobby soldering.
A serious limiting factor for some objections is the predetermined small dimension of the pcb.
Page 2, post #29, I provided pictures of the box I plan to pack the pcb in.
There are 4 screw holes on the bottom of the box. It is the space that defined the dimensions of the pcb.
The schematic is not simple, there are a lot of components, plus decoupling capacitors have been added, which are not on the schematic.
...
"... test points are missing from key component groups..."

Yeah I agree, a few TPs in key spots would have been really useful, there just wasn't room.
...
"...the silkscreen is positioned too close to the pads..."

This is, to put it direct: a total ignorance and inexprerience.
JLPCB gerber viewer shows it like that, in reality the situation is much better.
I've done thousands of pcbs with JLPcb so far and I know for sure that the real pcb is different from what you see in their viewer, in a positive way.
...
"...Regarding the ICs, there is no consistent orientation either, which complicates the component placement (Pick & Place) process.
In several areas (U3, U4, U5), soldering in sockets would be difficult..."

Who on Earth will use pick'n place on this through-hole hobby diy pcb!??
Total nonsense.
Just to add more stupid "arguments" to the whole post, right?
This is already excessively "strict" reasoning.
If it was SMD, I would agree.
But in the case of through-hole; these objections are meaningless.
Except maybe the part where you correctly noted that a pair of DIL sockets will be really problematic to wedge.
Whoever made Pulse Star 2... had more difficult tasks!
I even had to choose some modified "2.5mm" (a bit more, about 3mm) footprint for the resistors, something I've always avoided until now, always preferring horizontal 7.5mm footprints.
The main factor is too little space and too many components.
The main thing for me is that the detector works well for me.
I only intend to make one, for my hobby. This is not a pcb for professional mass production.
Of course, you always have all the freedom in the world to design the pcb that suits you best.
You should keep in mind that the metal detector is a "field thing" and that it is preferable to pack it all in the smallest possible box, at least that's my preference.
The big fancy "square meter" pcbs we've often seen on this forum are only really good for educational purposes and bench testing.
Ok, let's be fair, some of your objections are acceptable, all my "justifications" are even more fine.
We will agree that we are both right to some extent.
Beauty is in the choice.
Draw your "correct" pcb and I'll salute it!
...
However, your post has nothing to do with constructive criticism. I've been on this forum for too long and I'm no stranger to the human forum mentality.

[/QUOTE]

Hello Ivconic,

I am now giving you the opportunity to review some of my PCBs. If you think anything could be improved, please let me know. I value your opinion highly.

[pechkata]

Hi ivconic and scs-bg,
You are right! "Waving coins in front of the coil" is most wide popular useless presentation of the capabilities of the MD. See presentations of "Pirate" MD with only two integral circuits. With static coil and some settings this detector is capable to react to medium size coin from 25cm and to make Fe/non-Fe discrimination (for bigger targets). Opposite test - waving of the coil over the coin - gives totally different results! But, as ivconic say - every MD enthusiast have to pass this stage. The detector without EFE cancelation, Ground Balance feature and serious Fe/non-Fe discrimination is completely useless in the real practice.