ML patent Application

[crane]

.... however excess metal must move against a coil to become detectable.

Boy aren't you in for a surprise.
This is best demonstrated with a ground balancing PI detector. Place the coil flat on the ground away from metal, then place a coin on the ground at a distance from the edge of the coil where it would be detected if moving. The coin will then give a response if you pass a soft ferrite rod over the coin even though the coil and coin are both stationary.

As said before, a coil containing excess metal will have you digging ghost signals in mineralised ground that don't exist if using a properly made coil.

[crane]

I wouldn't class a test site as being homogenous.

mickstv,
These test sites were chosen because the ground over the horizontal drill holes is uniform during each sweep. The surface also suffers excessive water flow that has removed all of the normal concentrates that cover the typical gold bearing ground away from the creek. The tests Doug refer to actually prove this ground is unsuitable because the tests show that "Sharp Timings" worked well at the test site but couldn't be used up the slope.

I initially tested Enhance and FG on a strip of ground that varies dramatically in Normal timings over approx 6 meters. Nuggets from sub gram to a few grams were buried at depths up to around 6". There was no way of knowing if the signals were from the ground or targets when using Normal timings but each target gave a definite "dig me" signal in Enhance and FG.
As I said before, why would anyone test these timings in uniform ground at these test sites when they are obviously only meant to be used in variable ground that is often covered with hot rocks?

[KahlesMilcon]

Eric,

Some sections of track are not owned by the train company that is pulling/pushing the cars., These type of train track sections get paid per car crossing. Each car has 4 wheels per side there fore every 4 wheels is a car. Sounds like the owner of the track section was confirming the car payment reimbursment system.

Do not ask how I know , It is just some trivia that I picked up from a small railroad company that owns a 50 mile section of track here in N.C.

[Ferric Toes]

For all the effort of doing a litz wire coil one would expect the same methodology to be carried throughout the cabling as well. Careful windings ending up with terminations into large terminals and/or large solid-core/solid-screen cables would sound self defeating in the first place, and on the bench, test setup parts like the cable and connections are a game-changer. No gator clips!

Both coil and cable are Litz wire and that is what I used in post 90. Ideally you would want continuous insulated conductors between coil and cable, but there is no way of doing that without a soldered joint which breaks down the inter strand insulation at that point.

Eric.

[Aziz]

Gentlemen - may I remind you that the Geotech forums are for discussions on "The Technology of Treasure Hunting", as it states quite clearly under the big Geotech logo at the top of the page?

They are NOT to be used for Minelab bashing, or for the bashing of any other metal detector company for that matter. I think everyone here (except those who are taking part in this nonsense) are thoroughly fed up with this continued rhetoric. Please cease, or I will start removing the offending posts. If you find it difficult to stop then take it elsewhere to one of the other forums where they tolerate this sort of behaviour.

I know that Carl suggested simply ignoring the arguments if you don't want to read them, but this could only be acceptable if it was kept to one particular area entitled [perhaps] "The Wingeing and Whining Thread", in the Off-Topic Forum. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and the same arguments keep appearing in some otherwise very interesting threads that eventually get dragged down into the gutter, consequently destroying any attempt at a sensible discussion.

So - come on guys - get your act together!

Yes Sir Mr. Q!,

I have taken my magic and multi-colored pills now.
Long live ML! We love ML! We love their detectors. We love their patents.
See the 5000 performing very well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=h2XgiKNOKW4

Enough evidence?

My pills?, my pills!, my pills!, ... I need more pills...

Cheers,
Aziz

[ODM]

For all the effort of doing a litz wire coil one would expect the same methodology to be carried throughout the cabling as well. Careful windings ending up with terminations into large terminals and/or large solid-core/solid-screen cables would sound self defeating in the first place, and on the bench, test setup parts like the cable and connections are a game-changer. No gator clips!

[Ferric Toes]

Pot Core response curves. 1.5Fe = 1.5mm D ferrous ball. B = Brass ball. This was looking through 20mm chipboard.

Eric.

[Aziz]

Thanks Eric,

a magnificiant bypass solution.
Now split the solder joints once more and isolate them and the solder blobs get smaller.
So much for a patent application.

I like it.
Cheers,
Aziz

[Ferric Toes]

Let's get back to the theme of this thread as, like times before, threads get into a free wheeling mode and self destruct. Minelab have a particular problem in that their coil design relies on a very low resistance winding and cable. This means that the equivalent wire gauge is quite low (16AWG?). Joining the coil wire to the coax by means of an overlapped solder joint is impossible to do without producing, even with care, a blob that is detectable. I have just done it with a ML coil and ML cable. The coil is the TX half of a dud 11in DD now used as a mono and connected to my PI viscosity meter to give a digital readout of signal values.. The single joint is detectable at the centre of the coil at 10uS. Bring it close to the winding and the signal is strong. Put a ferrite sleeve over the joint and signal disappears. Place the joint in the centre of the coil to get a signal; pass a piece of solid magnetite rock over it at about 1/2in and the signal increases. Place joint on the coil winding and the magnetite causes the signal to decrease - just what you would expect from the different field directions and what the proximity of a permiable object would do. So for ML low resistance coils, the type of cable they use and where the cable/coil joins are positioned, the ferrite sleeve appears to have value.

Are there other ways of achieving this without the use of ferrite sleeves? First thing is to position the joins (solder blobs) away from the coil centre and upwards from the coil winding. I used a 2in long plastic extension at the position where the coil leadout and strain relief is. The join is in this extension which is then 2in above the TX coil winding. This is sufficient distance for the solder blob to be almost out of range of any modulation by the most aggressive "hot" rocks.

Another way is to split the joins as shown in the picture. Comparing the signals at 10uS delay the split join gives 1/20th the signal of a full join. The fact that there are now 4 joins instead of 2 makes little difference.

For normal PI use this whole thing is a bit academic, but if you are wanting to get below 10uS to, say, 5uS delay then at the shorter delay it will become important. However I would not be using heavy coil wire and cable, but something much lighter and with very much smaller joints. As I have mentioned before, the more important feature of short delays for small gold, is the big increase in viscous ground signal

By the way, I have used large half pot cores on which to design a detector that has the detection field just on one face. This was a industrial design that had mechanical moving parts behind the coil, and to prevent modulation by them. Also behind the pot core was the electronics and cable joins so that these were not detectable. One application was for companies cutting up chipboard, so as to prevent damage to the saw on bits of chopped up nails and wire that get into the raw material. Also, a head of this construction was made as a small coil for detecting beneath wire fences. The pot core in a metal box that I mentioned a couple of days ago was a real project, in case anyone thought I was being frivolous. Had to bolt a sensor on a railway line to count the number of wheels that went past on a freight train. Just a half pot core peeping out through a hole in an aluminium box, to prevent detection of the rail it was bolted too. Now there is a question - why would anyone want to count wheels on a moving train?


Comparison of Bifurcated Joint Technology with Single Joint Technology

Eric.

[Qiaozhi]

Simple!Most forums are de facto ML forums and ML's massive propaganda and spin campaign in all forms of the media and ML's use of it legal muscle/financial resources and using the patent system to kill off any competitors even when NO infringement of ML's patents or IP has been PROVEN beyond ALL reasonable doubt in the appropriate jurisdiction! Then of course forum pro ML fanatics use the web to ruthlessly attack,discredit,propagate lies about, harass or even threaten (threats of violence against me for example!!) those trying to bring a new competitive detector to market or have the courage to challenge ML's spin or their patents or dare question their corporate ethics!
dougAEGPF

Truly well said Doug!

I can imagine having another hobby:
Analysing patent-trolls patents and providing prior art, bypass solutions, proving the obvious theft, ...

Aziz

Gentlemen - may I remind you that the Geotech forums are for discussions on "The Technology of Treasure Hunting", as it states quite clearly under the big Geotech logo at the top of the page?

They are NOT to be used for Minelab bashing, or for the bashing of any other metal detector company for that matter. I think everyone here (except those who are taking part in this nonsense) are thoroughly fed up with this continued rhetoric. Please cease, or I will start removing the offending posts. If you find it difficult to stop then take it elsewhere to one of the other forums where they tolerate this sort of behaviour.

I know that Carl suggested simply ignoring the arguments if you don't want to read them, but this could only be acceptable if it was kept to one particular area entitled [perhaps] "The Wingeing and Whining Thread", in the Off-Topic Forum. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and the same arguments keep appearing in some otherwise very interesting threads that eventually get dragged down into the gutter, consequently destroying any attempt at a sensible discussion.

So - come on guys - get your act together!

[Aziz]

[QUOTE=dougAEGPF;169171]

Would you like to explain why that is so Doug??

Simple!Most forums are de facto ML forums and ML's massive propaganda and spin campaign in all forms of the media and ML's use of it legal muscle/financial resources and using the patent system to kill off any competitors even when NO infringement of ML's patents or IP has been PROVEN beyond ALL reasonable doubt in the appropriate jurisdiction! Then of course forum pro ML fanatics use the web to ruthlessly attack,discredit,propagate lies about, harass or even threaten (threats of violence against me for example!!) those trying to bring a new competitive detector to market or have the courage to challenge ML's spin or their patents or dare question their corporate ethics!
dougAEGPF

Truly well said Doug!

I can imagine having another hobby:
Analysing patent-trolls patents and providing prior art, bypass solutions, proving the obvious theft, ...

Aziz

[UrbanFox]

No, I'm not.

Oh yes you are!!

[Davor]

Sorry Davor. You are wrong.

No, I'm not.
On the better thought, yes, I think ML needs a lot of ferrite in their coils. It will surely make them immensely better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7WFyCVO_A

[UrbanFox]

[QUOTE=Davor;169161]excess metal must move against a coil to become detectable. Good luck finding anything with a coil with moving entrails! In case all the poorly welded joins with excess metal on them is used, there will be a minuscule rise in response, but a cyclostationary rise with no consequence for detection. To be able to deteriorate noise you'd need something noisy, which soldering alloys are not.QUOTE]

Sorry Davor. You are wrong.

http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showthread.php?20307-ML-patent-Application&p=168919#post168919

[Davor]

The type of ferrite obviously matters, especially with CW designs, but it obviously doesn't alter the balance on a mono coil!!

The patent mainly applies to pi designs that sample early where excess metal in the coil housing will respond as if moving relative to the coil when the coil passes over certain rocks and ground. You can test a few short length of soldered wires by passing them over a properly made coil. If the PI responds then a coil with similar joins will have you digging false signals in highly mineralised ground.

I think Carl is talking about using ferrite to rebalance a coil? Not the same thing.

Sure there is no problem with balancing a mono, however excess metal must move against a coil to become detectable. Good luck finding anything with a coil with moving entrails! In case all the poorly welded joins with excess metal on them is used, there will be a minuscule rise in response, but a cyclostationary rise with no consequence for detection. To be able to deteriorate noise you'd need something noisy, which soldering alloys are not. The relaxing magnetic domains are noisy, and the effect is called the Barkhausen effect. Ferrite is not known for Barkhausen effect, but is prone to saturation. This saturation is prone to modulation with earth field, acting as a magnetic amplifier.