This is why a metal detector has better sensitivity when tested in air, but less sensitivity in soil, as the soil has an effect.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
IDX-PRO+VDI
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Aleks85 View PostI doubt you'll succeed. The higher the TX power, the greater the influence of the ground. - that's what I think.Knowing influence we can subtract it from signal, we have also ground balance, reduction of influence 2 kHz frequency, lifting Rx coil from the ground as they do in TX/Rx models and more can be done.
Comment
-
I simulated my idea.Originally posted by Carl-NC View PostNo, it's not 50% more depth than other detectors. It's about the same as most other high-end detectors. Minelab claims 50% more "power" but (a) that's a meaningless term in metal detectors and (b) if they mean field energy then it represents a 7% increase.
Comment
-
Thanks.Originally posted by nejdet View Post
Option - thicker wire or higher supply voltage....
I have tested several detectors with the same size coil and targets.
According to my tests, there is a main question.
All detectors detects coins approximately from a the same depth, but there is a big difference for big targets.
For exp, some detectors detects the Steel tray (50cm Diameter) More than 50 cm depth difference!
What is strange is that all have a identical depth for coins!
Some believes that frequency plays a key role (lower frequency)!
Comment
-
Even with a low-impedance driver and a parallel cap you are still limited by the voltage compliance of the driver. If the driver supply is 8V then the peak-to-peak coil current is limited to
i(t) = 8V/(2*PI*6600*580uH) = 333mA
If this were not true, then it would imply that you could simply reduce the 47Ω resistor to get more current. But what you will see instead is an increase in waveform distortion as the current becomes more like a triangle wave, while the peak current does not increase.
Comment
-
What is surprising or new about that? It is simply a combined target/ground signal; you subtract the magnetic/ground component, all while keeping in mind the masking effect caused by the transmitting coil's field (specifically the field itself) in the near-surface zone.Originally posted by h9361 View PostThanks...
Comment
-
Thanks for your replying.Originally posted by Smirnov-Arta View PostWhat is surprising or new about that? It is simply a combined target/ground signal; you subtract the magnetic/ground component, all while keeping in mind the masking effect caused by the transmitting coil's field (specifically the field itself) in the near-surface zone.
All of my tests was Air test.
Subtracting magnetic/ground in Air test?!
All testing was based on identical situations, coil size, coin and big targets.
Comment

Comment