ML patent Application

[Davor]

Minelab detectors are the detector of choice for around 100% of serious prospectors in Australia.

And so is Lada the car of choice of serious men and women in Russia. Competition sucks

[UrbanFox]

------ just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!!
dougAEGPF

So, don't use smooth timings....use normal timing if normal timing gives better depth and sensitivity. If ground conditions preclude the use of normal timing because of noise, etc, then use a smooth timing. Sure you might not get the depth that normal timings will give when in good ground.

But Doug, you detail to the reader when they would need to use those timings and why. You might as well say the depth loss can be 100% if the detector is not switched on.

It must really get at you, Doug, that Minelab detectors are the detector of choice for around 100% of serious prospectors in Australia. Would you like to explain why that is so Doug?? Sour grapes and jealousy are a curse, aren't they Doug.

[dougAEGPF]

Doug, you are attempting to deceive today's reader by misrepresentation.

Here again is your statement, DougAEGPF, from your GoldProspectingInOz forum.....

"Come out here and I am sure that we will be only to happy to demonstrate how the TDI,Gs5B.Infinium etc just cannot detect many, many nuggets (including some shallow one's) that any ML can. Its a fact of life easily demonstrable at the test site or in the field.
Doug "

No deception!The truth just as this is the truth "------ just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!! " painful as it must be for you to accept! This has also been proved in the field on some VIRGIN nuggets detected in normal timings but gave NO signal in FG/SS/E!!!!! Some of these larger ,flatter nuggets will only give a signal when they are lying on their edge in SS/FG/E but NOT when lying flat.Perhaps you can provide us with an explanation for this?
dougAEGPF

[UrbanFox]

My statements are true (but from many years ago!!) just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!!
dougAEGPF

Doug, you are attempting to deceive today's reader by misrepresentation.

Here again is your statement, DougAEGPF, from your GoldProspectingInOz forum.....

"Come out here and I am sure that we will be only to happy to demonstrate how the TDI,Gs5B.Infinium etc just cannot detect many, many nuggets (including some shallow one's) that any ML can. Its a fact of life easily demonstrable at the test site or in the field.
Doug "

[dougAEGPF]

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.

What are the Electromagnetic characteristics of these certain rocks and ground?
dougAEGPF

[dougAEGPF]

I wouldn't class a test site as being homogenous. Either targets are placed into location which means the ground is over turned and no-longer uniform in structure or composition, or the site already had known targets which at some stage would have been dug to prove they are nugget's and once again the ground is no-longer uniform in structure or composition.

True! Indeed some damage has been caused at the test sites from people digging ground noises!!!!!!! The sites are definitely not homogenous!!! Other than the original boring for the pipes the ground is undisturbed (their has been some erosion from high creekflows) at least since the 1850's!
dougAEGPF

[UrbanFox]

I wouldn't class a test site as being homogenous. Either targets are placed into location which means the ground is over turned and no-longer uniform in structure or composition, or the site already had known targets which at some stage would have been dug to prove they are nugget's and once again the ground is no-longer uniform in structure or composition.

Or, the targets are placed in holes made by drilling horizontally into a creek bank. The soil between the target and coil is therefore not over turned.

[dougAEGPF]

Doug, you use what you want to use in the way of a detector. I would like to bring to the readers attention statements made by DougAEGPF as Doug on his previous forum.... GoldProspectingInOz......



Yes, I think that is a reasonable representation, Doug!

Now Doug, I found this next quote from you on your old GoldProspectingInOz forum quite interesting.....



So, really Doug, who were you addressing in that forum post conversation, and who are you trying to deceive now??

My statements are true (but from many years ago!!) just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!!
dougAEGPF

[UrbanFox]

But is the 5000 twice as good as the TDI (based on price)? No way!!!!Heck the 5000 can't even be set up with a mono coil to reject conductive objects based on their time constants! The TDI is also more ergonomic and does not require a Phd to learn to operate effectively! The TDI run in all metal mode ( both high and low conductors) also does not have the disastrous loss of depth that occurs on some longer Tc nuggets in FG,SS or enhance!!!! Is the 5000 5 times as good (based on price) as the water proof Infinium? I doubt it! If the QED had been allowed to proceed then consumers would had a detector comparable (or even exceeding in some areas) the performance of 5000 at about 1/5th the price! No wonder ML did not want it to see the light of day!!!!!!
dougAEGPF

Doug, you use what you want to use in the way of a detector. I would like to bring to the readers attention statements made by DougAEGPF as Doug on his previous forum.... GoldProspectingInOz......

Who has ever seen anyone here in OZ gold detecting with an infinium?Again the amount of gold found by it in Oz would I suggest would be miniscule as would it sales in the detector market.
Doug

Yes, I think that is a reasonable representation, Doug!

Now Doug, I found this next quote from you on your old GoldProspectingInOz forum quite interesting.....

Come out here and I am sure that we will be only to happy to demonstrate how the TDI,Gs5B.Infinium etc just cannot detect many, many nuggets (including some shallow one's) that any ML can. Its a fact of life easily demonstrable at the test site or in the field.
Doug

So, really Doug, who were you addressing in that forum post conversation, and who are you trying to deceive now??

[mickstv]

not the homogenous ground at a test site!

I wouldn't class a test site as being homogenous. Either targets are placed into location which means the ground is over turned and no-longer uniform in structure or composition, or the site already had known targets which at some stage would have been dug to prove they are nugget's and once again the ground is no-longer uniform in structure or composition.

[dougAEGPF]

[QUOTE=crane;169138]dougAEGPF,
Are you serious?
I do use a GPX5000 and I don't knock "Fine Gold" timings, you on the other hand don't use a GPX5000 but you do knock FG? Where do you get this stuff?


From extensive testing on dozens of nuggets up to 30ozs!!!!!!!!!Eg a solid 39 gram nugget NOT detected at 14" with a 18" NF mono in FG,SS or enhance!
dougAEGPF

[dougAEGPF]

But is the 5000 twice as good as the TDI (based on price)? No way!!!!Heck the 5000 can't even be set up with a mono coil to reject conductive objects based on their time constants! The TDI is also more ergonomic and does not require a Phd to learn to operate effectively! The TDI run in all metal mode ( both high and low conductors) also does not have the disastrous loss of depth that occurs on some longer Tc nuggets in FG,SS or enhance!!!! Is the 5000 5 times as good (based on price) as the water proof Infinium? I doubt it! If the QED had been allowed to proceed then consumers would had a detector comparable (or even exceeding in some areas) the performance of 5000 at about 1/5th the price! No wonder ML did not want it to see the light of day!!!!!!
dougAEGPF

[crane]

When you see the results of testing FG and enhance on some solid gold nuggets up to 30ozs you would know why!!!!
dougAEGPF

dougAEGPF,
Are you serious?
I do use a GPX5000 and I don't knock "Fine Gold" timings, you on the other hand don't use a GPX5000 but you do knock FG? Where do you get this stuff?

We already detect an area more than once with both small and large coils to make sure we don't miss much. We can still get more, such as flat nuggets on edge, by working at right angles to our chain lines and we would need to use every coil ever made to get it all.

As to using "Sharp", it can't be used on hot ground and is mainly used for checking a weak target so why mention it? And a DD in nomal timings will still respond to hot rocks!

These timings should only be used on the ground they were designed for, not the homogenous ground at a test site!

[crane]

Yes, in fact I have. I'm familiar with what ferrite does to the coil balance. Same goes with foil chips introduced to it. They can both improve the balance as well as make it worse, but in any case the nett effect is cyclostationary, hence of no consequence in such small sizes if the coil balance is maintained. There are some nonlinearities related to ferrite use, so I'd be very careful NOT to introduce it in quantities you suggest as beneficial for shielding the electronics within a coil, which is also a bad idea.
Iron parts producing Barkhausen noise are just about the only kind of material I can foresee to benefit from such shielding, but there is even simpler solution to that "problem": just don't use any iron parts in your coil. Have you tried electronic parts pins with a magnet?

No other material is able to produce any kind of uncorrelated noise, aside from the ferrite itself.

In every account this patent is useless to me.

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.

[UrbanFox]

dougAEGPF

Hi Doug, another little snippet from you on your previous forum.......

"I am not comparing my gs5b or the TDI with a $5000 dollar detector because to be truthful its not competitive in depth/densitivity/ground handling ability of even earlier model second hand ML detectors
doug "