Overcomming the DEPTH and SENSITIVITY HYPE!!!!

Rodog

Jr. Member
May 24, 2006
48
0
Macomb County, Michigan
OK time to open up this can of worms. Veterans and those in the know Correct me if i am wrong about any of this post. As some of you already know the F.C.C. regulates VLF metal detector transmit power to 100mw (milliwatts). About the same as a cheap childs walkie talkie. Now if all metal detector manufacturers are regulated to this maximum output, the only way to get the extra depth over the competition is to;

1. Have larger coils. Which is bad in trashy areas. And if you have highly mineralized soil a larger coil will see more mineralization which will really test your detectors ability to cancel out the ground. DD coils work better in this situation. Sees less volume of ground.

2. Maximize the coil design for the transmit and receive frequency. For efficiency.

3. Maximize the receive gain circuitry range of operation. This is what most manufacturers do. This is were end users get into trouble with sensitivity adjustments! All must understand that on todays modern VLF metal detectors the sensitivity adjustment is for the receive gain only, not for the detectors transmit power. So with that in mind relax if you have to turn the sensitivity of your detector down for your soil conditions in order to get the stable operation out of your detector for your area of operations. If you have to turn down the sensitivity you will not lose depth. You will only lose hearing the fringe targets because your current setup may be getting too much electromagnetic interference and your detectors ground cancelling abilities may be limited. In other words, if your detector has poor/cheap ground canceling circuitry and can't cancel out the ground very well than your 100mw of transmit power will not punch through the soil to give you the depth that you desire. When it comes to EMI, imagine the how many different radio signals pass through your walls and your body. Police, Fire Department, Local Government, County Govenment, AM radio, FM Radio, Airport Radar, Military Radar, Military Communications, Cellular phone towers and Cell phones,CB and Ham radios, High Tension power wires and well you get the message. Now see what really good shielding can do. This is why the guys and girls out in the rural areas with low mineralization can sometimes turn their sensitivity all the way up and can now hear all the deep targets that the city folks only hope for.

4. Maximize shielding from the control housing to the coil to stop the dreaded electromagnetic interference that plagues the high gain receive circuitry on the high dollar plastic housing models. Hmmm, Faraday shielding in the control housing, Hint Hint. Aluminum shielding spray on the inside of the control housings. Hint, Hint. EM interference goes right through plastic control housings. Plastic keeps the detector light in weight for your convenience.

5. Have true automatic WIDE RANGE ground adjust or filtering that can dismiss the worst soil conditions in the country without sacraficing depth in discrimination.. If it is designed around these parameters then it should work anywhere in the U.S..


So with all of this in mind and seeing that if you take away all of the bells and whistles Like T.I.D., Notch Discrimination, Multi-tones, Bell-Tones, Talking detectors, VLF machines really haven't changed that much.

I guess to me a maximized machine would start out with very efficient coil to transmit and receive frequency design. DD coil of course. With a compliment of Small, medium, and large coils. Maximized shielding from the control housing all the way to the coil stopping EMI in its tracks. And a true automatic wide range ground adjust that will work in the worst soil conditions in the country.

Now for the wants. He He. All metal detectors should be waterproof, and I'm talking about the control and battery housings. Coil covers should come standard on all new machines. I know PROFITS PROFITS PROFITS. VCO pinpointing should be standard on models that have a pinpoint button. Well after all that, now add the convenient bells and whistles and adjust the price accordingly. In other words in a line of VLF detectors from one manufacturer the cheapest turn on and go should get the same depth in the same soil conditions as the top of the line bellsin whistles model with the same size coil.

With all that said are there any electronic engineers and investors out there that would like to build a new detector that the users of this great hobby have been looking to find for a very long time. POST YOUR THOUGHTS, THANKS FOR LOOKING, and HH. ;)

Rodog
 

Upvote 0
R

rvbvetter

Guest
What I'm wondering is; If all detectors have a max of 100 mw transmitt power. Can or would it be possible or feasable for an owner of a detector to increase the transmitt power by replacing or modifying a part on the circuit board? Also, if it was possible. Would the reciever have trouble picking up the bounced signal, because of the increased depth? Would the reciever then have to be modified as well? I obviously don't know my electronics. But it's interesting thinking about it. HH
 

OP
OP
Rodog

Rodog

Jr. Member
May 24, 2006
48
0
Macomb County, Michigan
rvbvetter said:
What I'm wondering is; If all detectors have a max of 100 mw transmitt power. Can or would it be possible or feasable for an owner of a detector to increase the transmit power by replacing or modifying a part on the circuit board? Also, if it was possible. Would the receiver have trouble picking up the bounced signal, because of the increased depth? Would the receiver then have to be modified as well? I obviously don't know my electronics. But it's interesting thinking about it. HH

rvbvetter,

I would think that tinkering with the transmit side of a detectors circuitry and raising the output would make the detector unstable especially since the receive amplifier circuitry is designed with a fair amount of gain built in to pick up those weak signals. In other words if the transmit power were turned up the signal would probably overwelm the receive side of the detector making it really erratic causing one to really turn Sensitivity way down. In addition I forgot to mention that some manufacturers build in an additional audio gain circuitry to amplify the week sounds not the signal. Some call it High Boost etc., turning the Sense past recommended or preset. I guess on most detectors sensitivity adjustment is really just audio gain adjustment. Transmit and recieve are fixed.

Yall can jump in here anytime, ::)

Rodog
 

J

JDETT

Guest
This is really interesting stuff. In the old days of CB radio, guys used to "screwdriver" their amp circuit and get an increase from 3 watts to 6 or 8 or more. It was eather a "pot" or a variable resistor that regulated power to the final transsistor. With electrical circuts now controlled by micro chips is may be a lot harder. Back then to much Heat was a big problem that shorted the life of the radio. But at 100 mw there's not much heat.
 

indepmo

Jr. Member
Aug 6, 2006
33
2
Independence, MO
And remember when the old CB radios were outting out too much power, and you were transmitting over telephones, televisions, and even in some cases opening up automatic doors to stores that were nearby if you had a mobile radio with a linear in the car?

Just imaging if it was the same way with metal detectors and every time you hit a target, someone at a neighboring house or business would hear a beep over the phone or tv lol
 

rcasi44

Full Member
Jul 24, 2006
143
0
NE Illinois
There is a NASA engineer who has designed detectors for FISHER, his name is Tom Dankowski or NASA Tom. I believe the 3D and cz20 he designed. According to him the transmit electromagnetic signal wll reach 5ft. The problem is the sensitivity or the return signal. Then why won't a detector see or report the dime at 5ft? His quote, "sensitvity is the answer". "to boost sensitivity to this trementous level the detector would be extremely unstable, with the current technology." Rob
 

bakergeol

Bronze Member
Feb 4, 2004
1,268
176
Colorado
Detector(s) used
GS5 X-5 GMT
Hi Rodog
You asked to be corrected about your FCC statement. Well we see this myth expressed all the time on the forums as well as from manufacturers. You are pretty knowledgeable - I assume you visit Carl's Geotech forum and just probably missed the long thread on this. Or perhaps you know this and are just after some lively debate?


What we see a lot is this "When a metal detector is turned on, the power (measured in milliwatts) is a fixed/constant output, The FCC regulates maximum output/transmit power to 100 milliwatts." This is a old myth that has been around metal detectorists to explain why detectors can't be made to go deeper- even Fisher got it wrong.

Carl on the Geotech forum explained it quite well.

I also believe we have about reached the limits of what we can do with VLF technology. The future will be discriminating PIs. I can see this a bit with my PI- being able to ID metal with depth as PIs are not effected by ground mineralization as VLFs are. So still waiting for Dave's machine to reach production.




HH
George
 

rcasi44

Full Member
Jul 24, 2006
143
0
NE Illinois
I won't argue, but I never saw in writting in that post where detectors are exempt. If they know more than Tom and Fishers well and good. I like a forum where if they don't agree they ignore you and don't ask you to leave.

The original post talked about boosting transmit power. Try this, would your detector target a manhole cover at 5ft? Mine would. Therefore the transmit signal is reaching it and doesn't doesn't need to be stronger. The sensitivity is just not good enough to receive on a target with the mass of a dime. This is the problem that needs solving and that's all I said. Rob
 

Born2Dtect

Bronze Member
Jun 11, 2004
1,683
68
Hurlock, Maryland
Detector(s) used
XP Deus, Excalibur II
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
Answers to electronic design are not always simple. Each technology, VLF,PI, multifrequency, is limited by physics, physical properties. Most detector manufacturers have or are looking at new technology to get better depth, sensitivity, target & depth ID and more. They will find or even have found some answers. Then they have to get them to market and make money doing it. That is the hard part. A $50,000 dollar detector , no matter how good is out of my budget.

Ed Donovan
 

JW

Full Member
Apr 8, 2005
242
1
No. California
Detector(s) used
ML ExII, GPX4000
rcasi44 said:
I won't argue, but I never saw in writting in that post where detectors are exempt. If they know more than Tom and Fishers well and good. I like a forum where if they don't agree they ignore you and don't ask you to leave.

The original post talked about boosting transmit power. Try this, would your detector target a manhole cover at 5ft? Mine would. Therefore the transmit signal is reaching it and doesn't doesn't need to be stronger. The sensitivity is just not good enough to receive on a target with the mass of a dime. This is the problem that needs solving and that's all I said. Rob


PI detectors get great 'reception' of transmitted signal and go super deep on large objects but the discrimination stinks at the bottom half of the detection depth. How this happens is a bit out of my vocabulary... ;D

Reminds me of the CB days...

All electronic items are mandated by the FCC to receive any and all interference without putting out any of their own. Remote control transmitters are limited to certain strengths as to not interfere with 'important' communications, junior radio operators are required to register with the FCC if broadcasting over a certain strength as well...

Could you imagine the FCC coming down on rebel built ultra-modified metal detectors... :D
 

J

JDETT

Guest
OK, suppose you send 10 watts of power at that dime buried 5 ft. What ever small
bit of power hits that dime and is reflected back has to be more then a 100 mw would reflect, I think.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Top