Hello friends,
I have really good news for you!
The real target induced response feature is only recently available to my coil software. So the analysis is a real target response. See in the GoldProspectinginOz forum for further infos and how I am making the analysis.
I have analysed the split mono/spiral coil configurations further. It shows, that the evenly distributed windings from radius 1 to radius 2 will give the best possible response. Such a coils is a typical spiral coil. The spiral coil should use the full flux area to be optimal. One might perhaps want to have a hole in the center of the coil for pin-pointing aid. As this hole does not contribute much inductivity, the benefit for pin-pointing and less weight is obviously.
The coil windings will have of course very less interwire capacitance. However, the spiral coil cannot be shielded perfectly without adding much capacitance to the shielding. The simulation shows, that an approximation of a spiral coil can be achieved by using split coils evenly distributed in the dimensions with same number of windings each. Each splitted coil can be shielded easier with less shielding capacitance and will cause less eddy currents from the shielding. The interwire coil capacitance will also be quite less (lesser than an equivalent round compact wound mono coil).
Now some comments on the chart:
I have analysed the 20" coil, as this spares some simulation time due to less flux area. But generally, the result applies also to all possible dimensions. It also applies to elliptical coils. The equivalent coil responses are shown for 10", 20" and 30".
The coil 20"+15"+10"+5" round mono means: four splitted coils with 20", 15", 10" and 5" diameter with same number of windings each.
The coil 20"+10" round mono means: two splitted coils with 20" and 10" diameter (each same number of windings).
The coil 20"-5" spiral round mono means: evenly wounded spiral coil from diameter 5" to 20" (I think ~31 turns here for 300 µH).
All coils have total 300µH (reference base). Other simulation results show (not shown yet), that changing the number of turn in each splitted coil does not give an improvement yet (to be analysed further).
Conclusions: The 20"-5" spiral coil outperforms an equivalent 30" round mono coil for the given target (20 mm diameter) up to the distance of 50 cm! The 20"+15"+10"+5" coil is almost as good as the spiral coil, which can be shielded with less capacitance.
Now I need your help to prove this by your practical measurements. I haven't the means for this at the moment. You know, I am a very very poor guy. It will be much appreciated.

Aziz
Where is chemelec?
I think, this finding will enjoy him.
I have really good news for you!
The real target induced response feature is only recently available to my coil software. So the analysis is a real target response. See in the GoldProspectinginOz forum for further infos and how I am making the analysis.
I have analysed the split mono/spiral coil configurations further. It shows, that the evenly distributed windings from radius 1 to radius 2 will give the best possible response. Such a coils is a typical spiral coil. The spiral coil should use the full flux area to be optimal. One might perhaps want to have a hole in the center of the coil for pin-pointing aid. As this hole does not contribute much inductivity, the benefit for pin-pointing and less weight is obviously.
The coil windings will have of course very less interwire capacitance. However, the spiral coil cannot be shielded perfectly without adding much capacitance to the shielding. The simulation shows, that an approximation of a spiral coil can be achieved by using split coils evenly distributed in the dimensions with same number of windings each. Each splitted coil can be shielded easier with less shielding capacitance and will cause less eddy currents from the shielding. The interwire coil capacitance will also be quite less (lesser than an equivalent round compact wound mono coil).
Now some comments on the chart:
I have analysed the 20" coil, as this spares some simulation time due to less flux area. But generally, the result applies also to all possible dimensions. It also applies to elliptical coils. The equivalent coil responses are shown for 10", 20" and 30".
The coil 20"+15"+10"+5" round mono means: four splitted coils with 20", 15", 10" and 5" diameter with same number of windings each.
The coil 20"+10" round mono means: two splitted coils with 20" and 10" diameter (each same number of windings).
The coil 20"-5" spiral round mono means: evenly wounded spiral coil from diameter 5" to 20" (I think ~31 turns here for 300 µH).
All coils have total 300µH (reference base). Other simulation results show (not shown yet), that changing the number of turn in each splitted coil does not give an improvement yet (to be analysed further).
Conclusions: The 20"-5" spiral coil outperforms an equivalent 30" round mono coil for the given target (20 mm diameter) up to the distance of 50 cm! The 20"+15"+10"+5" coil is almost as good as the spiral coil, which can be shielded with less capacitance.
Now I need your help to prove this by your practical measurements. I haven't the means for this at the moment. You know, I am a very very poor guy. It will be much appreciated.

Aziz
Where is chemelec?
I think, this finding will enjoy him.
Comment