Open Metal Detector Project Charter

[hdphilip]

Would you buy one before an oscilloscope though Philip? I know which one I would rather have if I could only have one.

hands down a oscilloscope, delayed sweep would be great, at least a 20mhz, would be a good place to start, and also maybe build moodz unipi computer interface, it makes the perfect low cost pulse generator for PI metal detector timimng,

Philip

oh, i just posted a new video in my thread, if anyones insterested.

[Davor]

where?

[sido]

"Forget about any kind of large scale self-production. You can't do it. Don't even try"

Carl, i would say your partially incorrect, sort of misleading........... There are ways to get a large scale operation at minimal cost and make some descent profit out of it. Lets say that a working design is established and known to be working and ready for production. There are Manufacturers of electronics products that are willing to work with you at minimal cost setup to yourself or in this case a collective group here. I will mention the Chinese, just bear in mind it has been a hot topic of debate of late and no intention by me to fuel any further fire here, but only to explain how it can be done.

If say 10 people are involved in developing a working detector here, this can be taken to a Manufacturer where an agreement can be made that the final product is not going to be owned by either partys, in this case the 10 people involved or the Manufacturer themselves, but what can be agreed is exclusive rights to each individual parties to sell the final given product in there own niche market, country etc and the remaining potential selling markets is up to the Manufacturer as to where else they would want to see the product sold too. The only exclusive rights to part of the product is the Manufacturer owns the tooling, dies, molds etc due to the overall initial cost setup involved and the majority of money invested by them in producing them.

This has be done in the past and continues to be done in their neck of the woods as known Manufacturing practices, where individual(s) and Manufacturer receive profits from any such sales. You obviously do have to buy the final product off them as minimum units agreed upon, obviously at a reduced price rate. The more units that are sold the better for all and your initial small investment is recouped fairly quick this way.

I can tell you that the Manufacturer already has 10 PR's in specific locations around the world, where they would of not had otherwise. It starts to look better now, doesn't it?

Making massed produced circuit boards here from 10 developers is not the problem or issues. Its the cosmetic and final half descent professional looking product where problems are encountered.

Upon agreement the tooling cost's are shared between each parties involved where most of the cost goes back to the Manufacturer if they are convinced enough and see the potential of the end product.

So basically where it would have cost 100% total to the individuals, the total initial investment cost now ends up being around the 30-40% mark as a minimum. Now split that between 10 individuals.....now you can see that each ones initial funding cost is around the 3-4% mark and obviously looks more like a feasable proposition when figures are presented in this way.

So, when someone says it cannot be done, then consider the above as it can be done.....possibly the (one and only) way to be able to mass produce a final product at a minimal small risk in initial investment costs to individual(s).

Sid

[chudster]

"Forget about any kind of large scale self-production. You can't do it. Don't even try"

Carl, i would say your partially incorrect, sort of misleading........... There are ways to get a large scale operation at minimal cost and make some descent profit out of it. Lets say that a working design is established and known to be working and ready for production. There are Manufacturers of electronics products that are willing to work with you at minimal cost setup to yourself or in this case a collective group here. I will mention the Chinese, just bear in mind it has been a hot topic of debate of late and no intention by me to fuel any further fire here, but only to explain how it can be done.

If say 10 people are involved in developing a working detector here, this can be taken to a Manufacturer where an agreement can be made that the final product is not going to be owned by either partys, in this case the 10 people involved or the Manufacturer themselves, but what can be agreed is exclusive rights to each individual parties to sell the final given product in there own niche market, country etc and the remaining potential selling markets is up to the Manufacturer as to where else they would want to see the product sold too. The only exclusive rights to part of the product is the Manufacturer owns the tooling, dies, molds etc due to the overall initial cost setup involved and the majority of money invested by them in producing them.

This has be done in the past and continues to be done in their neck of the woods as known Manufacturing practices, where individual(s) and Manufacturer receive profits from any such sales. You obviously do have to buy the final product off them as minimum units agreed upon, obviously at a reduced price rate. The more units that are sold the better for all and your initial small investment is recouped fairly quick this way.

I can tell you that the Manufacturer already has 10 PR's in specific locations around the world, where they would of not had otherwise. It starts to look better now, doesn't it?

Making massed produced circuit boards here from 10 developers is not the problem or issues. Its the cosmetic and final half descent professional looking product where problems are encountered.

Upon agreement the tooling cost's are shared between each parties involved where most of the cost goes back to the Manufacturer if they are convinced enough and see the potential of the end product.

So basically where it would have cost 100% total to the individuals, the total initial investment cost now ends up being around the 30-40% mark as a minimum. Now split that between 10 individuals.....now you can see that each ones initial funding cost is around the 3-4% mark and obviously looks more like a feasable proposition when figures are presented in this way.

So, when someone says it cannot be done, then consider the above as it can be done.....possibly the (one and only) way to be able to mass produce a final product at a minimal small risk in initial investment costs to individual(s).

Sid

Having been involved making products 'fit for use', remember that there is a big gap between a design that can be used by an electronic hobbyist (who understands the design and its foibles) and a product for the field that is waterproof (to some level), immune to salt and dust ingress, temperature stable (and operational), rugged and simple to operate with good ergonomics. Then lets talk about manufacturability! That 'productionisation' is really underestimated at the R&D level that most of us are operating at and I would imagine is a part of the design and engineering that is not of interest to many- however some of those constraints need to be applied to the design from early on.

I think that we need to draw a line in the sand at what kind of designs we are aiming for as being 'open'. At the moment pulling together what I see is that the charter principle should simply be "The possibility of profits." and leave it at that. That might mean that an open design is made for hobbyists and then taken to the next level to production design by those who wish to or maybe by industry with blessing. It does not push us to the 'slimy corporatism' end of the scale but neither does it exclude all commercial aspirations or uses. It allows for people the possibility to get back some of their development costs (through some mechanism) and is consistent with the views that have been expressed by a number of people that they are doing this as a hobby but do not want to completely exclude that some collateral benefit or their costs might come back.

On another note I am pleased to announce that we have quorum. Enough people have come forward to put their cards on the table, identified themselves and provided diversity of view that is representative of the forum. They are people free of industry influence and also largely free of antipathy to industry although its inevitable that some have battle scars! Given that BW's situation has catalyzed this discussion that is not inappropriate.

Please keep posting thoughts and ideas on this thread as it is all being taken into consideration and look out for the result of our coffee discussion!

Chudster

[Carl-NC]

Sid,

You can surely find PCB manufacturers. That's not hard. What's hard is to find companies that do everything else, and will do it for a reasonable cost. How much does tooling cost for a tubing swager? An injection mold for cam locks? Then fab houses want to run 10,000 pcs... you only want 1000 or 100? The costs go up astronomically.

The point is, if all you want to do is hand-build one-a-week and sell them for prestige, then self-production is a solution. If you want to seriously get something back for your efforts, self-production is foolish. The up-front costs are enormous; splitting the costs amongst 10 people also splits the returns amongst 10 people. The production planning, coordination, and back end work will eat you alive. And it doesn't take much to go wrong to sink the whole deal. Look at the Nemesis. Dave would be in his 3rd year of sales by now if he had chosen a different path.

Detector companies have everything set up & ready, including marketing, sales, and service. The cost of producing 100 units to test out the market is almost nothing. And if the product takes off, ramping up to 100/week or more is easy. And all you have to do at that point is sit back and cash your royalty checks. Oh yeah, and work on that next great idea.

- Carl

[sido]

Sid,

You can surely find PCB manufacturers. That's not hard. What's hard is to find companies that do everything else, and will do it for a reasonable cost. How much does tooling cost for a tubing swager? An injection mold for cam locks? Then fab houses want to run 10,000 pcs... you only want 1000 or 100? The costs go up astronomically.- Carl

Carl, have you ever considered there are ways around this. Think outside the box. There are already Manufactured detector stems and coils housings out there and no need to re-invent the wheel. Example that comes to mind is a particular line of Gold Century detectors that produce a quality stem and coil housing that rivals the big boy's. Most of them a crap though, but some are made of high quality materials with carbon fiber lower shafts. If need to be with slight modification to the Arm cup rest can be produced for any such detector stem already in mass production, providing you are able to licence part of that existing product, but i am sure there are ways around this.

The point is, if all you want to do is hand-build one-a-week and sell them for prestige, then self-production is a solution. If you want to seriously get something back for your efforts, self-production is foolish. The up-front costs are enormous; splitting the costs amongst 10 people also splits the returns amongst 10 people. The production planning, coordination, and back end work will eat you alive. And it doesn't take much to go wrong to sink the whole deal. Look at the Nemesis. Dave would be in his 3rd year of sales by now if he had chosen a different path.Carl

Agree with the fact that it will not take much for something to go wrong, seeing everyone involved is geographically placed all over the world and co-operation and effort is and will be limited. Splitting the cost would not be a issue when you consider the start up cost will be at minimal. As for sales, service and repair the personal are already here.

Detector companies have everything set up & ready, including marketing, sales, and service. The cost of producing 100 units to test out the market is almost nothing. And if the product takes off, ramping up to 100/week or more is easy. And all you have to do at that point is sit back and cash your royalty checks. Oh yeah, and work on that next great idea.

- Carl

The whole idea of looking at other option's is to minimize the initial setup costs. Royalties, what royalties.....i can say no-one will see a cent here, just a part of corporate greed. The first unit in production does not have to have the flashiest cosmetics (Detector box). It only needs to be practical, usable and reliable. Sales and marketing is another thing, put a working product in the market, you already have a medium such as forums that will not only allow people to see the progress in design but will have the necessary feedback to see if the product is fit for use and changes that can be implemented in say version 2.

There are ways of minimizing substantial initial start up costs, such as the examples listed above. If someone thinks that you will start making money from the first line of production, well they should re-think there short term intentions.

I say stick to hobby kits for now, get a working detector out there. A circuit diagram out on its own wont cut and if keep changing the design as mentioned before......well you will be doing this for years to come with no end result.

Sid

[Davor]

Yeah, I think the way to go is off the shelf. It will surely not look Mickey Mouse-ish like ace 250, but heck, design is not the strong point of the most detectors I've seen. Lets consider this a non-issue.

My reality here is that by a small scale production on my own I can make an average CEO's income, but that is beside the point because I don't want to do that, yet. The point is that there are fellow hobbyists that do see it as an opportunity to make living from projects such as these, and the incredible prices of the top of the line detectors offered by the market leading companies that may just make it happen.

Frankly, I can't see any other electronics market that may offer such return, not even HiFi because they are heavily loaded with marketing, while this market is still self propelled, and far far away from being saturated.

I'm sure there are countries with eager hobbyists that could step in and find it a good opportunity to feed their families. In a way it is a perfect production/distribution chain as well - your shipment and repairs costs are incredibly low because you buy and fix things at your local hobbyist. Ivconic once mentioned some unbelievable costs of sending a rig to be repaired abroad. That counts too.

[Aziz]

Hi guys,

I'm missing the real goal of such a project. Remember, companies have the goal to make profits.

What a goal could have a hobbyist?
- Learning: How detectors work?
- Fun: DIY, smelling solder fume, ...?
- Poor man's solution: DIY to make it very cheap by yourself?
- Sport: Challenging the best?
- Profit & Living: Small production line?
- The intellectual challenge: Making something sophisticated, you can't even buy.
..

What are you going to do? What's your goal?
Cheers,
Aziz

[moodz]

Hi guys,

I'm missing the real goal of such a project. Remember, companies have the goal to make profits.

What a goal could have a hobbyist?
- Learning: How detectors work?
- Fun: DIY, smelling solder fume, ...?
- Poor man's solution: DIY to make it very cheap by yourself?
- Sport: Challenging the best?
- Profit & Living: Small production line?
- The intellectual challenge: Making something sophisticated, you can't even buy.
..

What are you going to do? What's your goal?
Cheers,
Aziz

I love the smell of solder in the morning ... it smells like breakfast

Aziz has hit the nail on the head ....the hobbyist seeks the things above ... not commercial success ....we can call them Aziz's rules.

Manufacturers dont hang around posting on boards or publish their finished designs .... and never their developmental designs ... so forget this ... .... the distributed model proposed will never work as consumers will not get consistant service or products from hobbyists. Thats what manufacturers are for ... they are organised, they have a plan and a vision, they have Intellectual Property and importantly they have TRADE SECRETS ... the essential ingredient in any product that adds that little bit of finesse that means the difference between a quality, functional product and a poorly made, poor performing product ... this is something that the hobbyists will never achieve as there is no motive for the hobbyist to conform to a common goal. ( in a company you get to keep your job if you stay on track ... a pretty good motive ).

All a hobbyist can do is build the best detector he can WITHOUT using someone elses IP and at best he/she will achieve some or all of the things that Aziz mentions above ....if you can make some money by selling the design to a manufacturer then good luck to you ...but if you want to be a manufacturer ... why choose the M/D business ... its so niche .... and there are wider/easier opportunities out there.

moodz.

[moodz]

....and while I am on the subject .. the hobbyists here would be far better served if someone came up with a "board and interconnect" standard or adopted one ... ( eg arduino style etc ) with standard sizing / casing / interconnects for digital, analogue and power signals etc etc. I find the arduino sheild "real estate" is a bit small for complex designs unless you are using surface mount however maybe a passive carrier board which can plug arduinos and other formats might be suitable. Also there should be bulk buys for hard to get / expensive components, wire and a good source of standard shafts, boxes, coil housing etc etc etc.

[moodz]

.... and further more .... I should have put this in one long rant post LOL ...... I am sure most of you have heard the term "race to the bottom" ... if there was a high performance detector module available for around $100 eg as an assembled PCB from Hongkong or somewhere that hobbyists could tweak and put in their own box etc etc and it was comparable or better in performance than the top line detectors sold by manufacturers then of course every man and his dog would be after one of these specials as they would stand to save some 1000s of dollars over a commercial equivalent..... there will of course always be people who buy commercial ... but the price of high performance detectors as we know it would literally "race to the bottom" as people in the know would be able to source an equivalent detector from "backyarders" for maybe $500 total. ( eg hobbyists etc making a buck and cheap chinese or other source copies ). Of course the military and industrial markets would not suffer to the same degree but it would certainly put a dent in the hobbyist / prosumer pricing model.
moodz

[Aziz]

.... and further more .... I should have put this in one long rant post LOL ...... I am sure most of you have heard the term "race to the bottom" ... if there was a high performance detector module available for around $100 eg as an assembled PCB from Hongkong or somewhere that hobbyists could tweak and put in their own box etc etc and it was comparable or better in performance than the top line detectors sold by manufacturers then of course every man and his dog would be after one of these specials as they would stand to save some 1000s of dollars over a commercial equivalent..... there will of course always be people who buy commercial ... but the price of high performance detectors as we know it would literally "race to the bottom" as people in the know would be able to source an equivalent detector from "backyarders" for maybe $500 total. ( eg hobbyists etc making a buck and cheap chinese or other source copies ). Of course the military and industrial markets would not suffer to the same degree but it would certainly put a dent in the hobbyist / prosumer pricing model.
moodz

Get ready to be legally sued!!!!

[Carl-NC]

There are already Manufactured detector stems and coils housings out there and no need to re-invent the wheel.

That's what Dave did with the Nemesis. Ask him how that turned out.

Royalties, what royalties.....i can say no-one will see a cent here, just a part of corporate greed.

That's what Eric did with the TDI. Ask him how that turned out.

[Carl-NC]

What are you going to do? What's your goal?

That's the very first question that must be answered. And, unfortunately, when you try to get 10 people together for a collaboration there may be 10 different goals.

[hdphilip]

Carl,

can i get a bigger in box, i have to keep deleting my lab notes

Philip