Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

field test unit no 001 "model T"

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Actually, there is no need to have a front end that is flat down to dc. Some of the industrial PI detectors that I designed in the 1990’s had a bandpass characteristic that rolled off rapidly below 200Hz, This was done by means of an active filter in the feedback loop. The purpose here was to give more attenuation to both 50Hz and 60Hz line frequencies, the levels of which can be high in an industrial environment. The active filter involved a couple of capacitors which could be described as being in the signal chain. Generally, industrial detectors are just required to sense the presence or absence of metal in a product and the decay characteristic is irrelevant.

    However the requirements of gold nugget detectors are somewhat more stringent, especially if effective ground balance and/or discrimination is required. Whatever circuit elements are incorporated, IMHO they should not distort the received waveform, particularly so for accurate ground balance at all coil heights i.e. large changes in signal amplitude with a mono coil.

    I find that with conventional dual sampling and analogue integration I can achieve all the earth’s field cancellation I need when using a 25in diameter coil and also be completely insensitive to maghemite “hot” rocks that have a level of remanent magnetism in addition to the viscous signal. At this point I will say that my preamp and integrator is quite different to what you see in popular PI schematics. Recently, I experimented with a dual differential 25in coil which would give additional high levels of earth’s field attenuation, but was primarily to cancel low frequency em noise. As far as earth’s field went the improvement was not noticeable because the main noise source is still the front end amplifier. Strictly speaking, not the amplifier but the 1K input resistor, and I know what to do about that.

    I used to wave ferrite magnets over the coil to check earth’s field cancellation, but now use a low frequency signal generator to inject a 5Hz sine wave into the RX input. This way you can control the amplitude and set it such that the signal swing is well within the linear range of the amplifier/integrator. Ferrite magnets close to the coil can induce a superimposed magnetostrictive ringing on the RX waveform, but when only a few inches away the 1K noise predominates.

    I am old school electronics but it is good to see new ideas, such as those which Moodz is developing, being investigated and applied in PI technology. Let’s encourage him and others to persevere with their work, particularly in reducing noise by means of novel front ends, new coil configurations, dsp, etc. After all, the performance of any detector is basically a S/N problem.

    Eric.

    Comment


    • Hey guys,

      the "MadLabs Inc."(c)(r)(tm) will drive you mad and confuse you in the first instance. It's a tacticle mind operation to get you thinking of the issue.
      Furthermore, it is forcing you to do some homework. You know, there is no "free lunch" in the evil world. Do some hard work for your "lunch".

      If you have understood the issue correct, you also will understand the target signal loss with the subtraction method (the infamous detection hole).

      The "MadLabs Inc."(c)(r)(tm) with its first medically certified mad engineer just want to help you.

      Aziz,
      the master of madman

      Comment


      • Hi Eric, thanks for your very valuable contribution.
        Cheers,
        Aziz

        Comment


        • Hi all,

          anyone made the proof?

          (I'm lazy. I'm too much lazy to do it by myself. Hey, it was a trick to motivate you to do it for me. *LOL*)

          Ok, another trick - ooops - a motivation for you.
          A job offer:
          Anyone, who solves the proof can be a member of "MadLabs Inc."(c)(r)(tm). No earnings (hey, mad companies don't make any profits ).
          Deal?

          Cheers,
          Aziz

          Comment


          • Oh man!, I give up.
            You guys don't want to share good metal detecting science (except Eric and Moodz). You all want to make heaps of $$$$ profits $$$$ out of it. Ain't it?
            No job offer now. "MadLabs Inc."(c)(r)(tm)() is driving mad.
            Aziz

            Comment


            • Win a Prize!!!

              Ok, ya wanna win a prize now? (bling!, bling!, bling!)
              (Would my own personal impression satisfy you?)

              The infamous subtraction method of two samples:
              - High-pass filter?
              - 1. Order? 20 dB/decade roll-off/on?
              - Transfer characteristic?


              Hey guys, this is really very very important to know it now. Don't tell me, that the issue has lasted for 30 years (the subtraction method) and nobody in the universe has not really analysed it yet.


              Who is going to bite the bullet now?
              (I mean to win the prize?)
              Good luck to whom ever.

              Aziz
              Last edited by Aziz; 11-29-2012, 10:13 PM. Reason: bugs corrected

              Comment


              • Ok, I have published the results somewhere in the metal detecting forums.
                Have a look. And eat it! *LOL*
                Aziz

                Comment


                • Subtraction method is at least 44 years old and maybe 46. I wrote an article describing it in an italian archaeological magazine in 1968, but there was another earlier version, by another engineer, using tuned circuits in 1966. Sounds crazy, but yes a PI that used a narrow band tuned amplifier post sampling. Sampling, subtraction and integration is not equivalent to RC high pass filter as a swept frequency test will show.

                  Eric.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Aziz View Post
                    Ok, I have published the results somewhere in the metal detecting forums.
                    Have a look. And eat it! *LOL*
                    Aziz
                    I have searched the Geotech forums for your alleged post, but it seems to have gone AWOL.
                    Or have you posted it on an off-site forum?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Qiaozhi View Post
                      I have searched the Geotech forums for your alleged post, but it seems to have gone AWOL.
                      Or have you posted it on an off-site forum?
                      Oh well, the universe is big. So the internet (almost).
                      It's published on AEGP Forum.

                      http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...-pi-technology
                      (membership required)

                      Aziz

                      PS: Thanks Eric. The subtraction method is fairly old. Probably older than me.

                      Comment


                      • My recent lurker membership was cancelled without warning, and I'm not about to renew it. Best rewrite it (differently to avoid lifting your own post) and bring it here. I have some relevant maths in my archives, which I will also try and locate.

                        Eric.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Ferric Toes View Post
                          My recent lurker membership was cancelled without warning, and I'm not about to renew it. Best rewrite it (differently to avoid lifting your own post) and bring it here. I have some relevant maths in my archives, which I will also try and locate.

                          Eric.
                          Aziz - I agree with Eric, as I have no intention of registering with the other forum.
                          Please rewrite your post here. Thanks.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Ferric Toes View Post
                            My recent lurker membership was cancelled without warning, and I'm not about to renew it. Best rewrite it (differently to avoid lifting your own post) and bring it here. I have some relevant maths in my archives, which I will also try and locate.

                            Eric.
                            Eric if you are referring to my forum then your statement above is UNTRUE! Your membership of AEGPF has NOT been cancelled without warning! You are still a member!!!!! Your membership has never been cancelled! If you cannot login then contact me by email for a password reset!
                            dougAEGPF.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by dougAEGPF View Post
                              Eric if you are referring to my forum then your statement above is UNTRUE! Your membership of AEGPF has NOT been cancelled without warning! You are still a member!!!!! Your membership has never been cancelled! If you cannot login then contact me by email for a password reset!
                              dougAEGPF.
                              That there is funny!! Settle down dug, we all still love you!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Qiaozhi View Post
                                Aziz - I agree with Eric, as I have no intention of registering with the other forum.
                                Please rewrite your post here. Thanks.
                                By the way, I didn't mean that in a derogatory sense.
                                It's just that I don't want the temptation of reading numerous forums.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X