Ground Balance Theory

[Aziz]

i claim the WBGB title based on latest tests and hard copy patent applications not theories. Why remove the ground signal through processing when you can actively cancel it ....works on all coil topologies including standard monocoils.

Yippiiiieeeeyaaayeeaaah,

Moodz has understood the ultimate WBGB-saga(c)(r)(tm)(ultra)(hyper)(ultimate)!

Where are the forum trolls? Hey, there is another WBGB out there....


Looking forward to Moodz detector....
It's the end of .
(You know what I mean) *LOL*

Cheers,
Aziz

[Prospector_Al]

Hi Aziz,

Very elegant mathematical demonstration of the "Detection Hole". For those of experimental bent: One can construct a very simple "Hole Detector". Mine consists of 8 turns of #18 wire, wound around a 3.5" coil form, terminated with a 5 ohm potentiometer.

With this contraption you can tune in various TCs. The amplitude of the signal varies with the potentiometer setting, but what's characteristic of a hole, is that the detector response increases again after you pass a specific Tc, although the signal amplitude may be actually lower.

Correlating the hole information with known Tcs of nuggets, you will know what size nuggets you are leaving in the ground...

Happy Hunting,

Allan

[Prospector_Al]

I don't think you'll see any field test results any time soon. Considering what happened to the QED, I think that a materially different approach is in the works. Aziz is just having fun, but he's not going to divulge what he knows. Likewise, the first few hundred unit of the detector are sold to trusted individuals only, with a contrac including a confidentialiy clause. The owners are sworn to secrecy and face severe legal consequences if they breach the contract.

It's actually in their best interest to abide by the contract, since they get the first chance to explore areas that are now considered played out. The increased depth capability and the accurate Fe/Non-Fe discrimination will make barren areas fertile agan.

Allan

P.S. I am also sworn to secrecy

[Aziz]

I don't think you'll see any field test results any time soon. Considering what happened to the QED, I think that a materially different approach is in the works. Aziz is just having fun, but he's not going to divulge what he knows. Likewise, the first few hundred unit of the detector are sold to trusted individuals only, with a contrac including a confidentialiy clause. The owners are sworn to secrecy and face severe legal consequences if they breach the contract.

It's actually in their best interest to abide by the contract, since they get the first chance to explore areas that are now considered played out. The increased depth capability and the accurate Fe/Non-Fe discrimination will make barren areas fertile agan.

Allan

P.S. I am also sworn to secrecy

You will get a written last warning by my lawyers soon!!!

I'll reveal the whole mystery. But only on the A1 forum and when the members there contribute to the GB project.

Aziz

[Alexismex]

These people are crazy ...don't understand anything

[Paul99]

These people are crazy ...don't understand anything

Yeah, I think there are a few crazy people here also Alexismex!

[sido]

Not crazy.........but who wants to reveal the ultimate GB system without it being wisked away and made legally their own?

Dont blame them all....Ferric toes, moodz, Al, Aziz etc...to name a few.

Every reason to keep the practical side of things under wrap. If its warranted then it will be posted.
For now....we just have wait, the less competent.

Cheers Sid

[mikebg]

...
For now....we just have wait, the less competent.
Cheers Sid

Sido, please don't wait, but read WEB resources for convolution and deconvolution. For "less competent" Australians, I posted in the Doug's forum an illustration in TD (time domain):

http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...8082/#msg28082

and another illustration in FD (frequency domain):

http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...8090/#msg28090

To remove illustrated there convolution of targets impulse response h5(t) with impulse responses h4(t) and h6(t) of ground, should be used deconvolution software, suitable for metal detecting. The WEB contains a lot of information about deconvolution:

http://www.deconvolve.net/DNDownloads.html
http://www.bialith.com/
https://sites.google.com/site/ptadrous/

MATLAB and OCTAVE have a built-in function for deconvolution: deconv.

[moodz]

Sido, please don't wait, but read WEB resources for convolution and deconvolution. For "less competent" Australians, I posted in the Doug's forum an illustration in TD (time domain):

http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...8082/#msg28082

and another illustration in FD (frequency domain):

http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...8090/#msg28090

To remove illustrated there convolution of targets impulse response h5(t) with impulse responses h4(t) and h6(t) of ground, should be used deconvolution software, suitable for metal detecting. The WEB contains a lot of information about deconvolution:

http://www.deconvolve.net/DNDownloads.html
http://www.bialith.com/
https://sites.google.com/site/ptadrous/

MATLAB and OCTAVE have a built-in function for deconvolution: deconv.

..what is all this convolution stuff ...that implies the ground and targets are like semiconductors .. ie non linear and that freq multiplication is taking place.
Secondly you are missing a major factor in your model assumptions. This is terribly confusing the GB issue which turns out to be rather simple. Here's a clue for you ..physics has a principle of reciprocity your analysis is being done like the coil ain't part of the system being analysed.

[sido]

Sido, please don't wait, but read WEB resources for convolution and deconvolution. For "less competent" Australians, I posted in the Doug's forum an illustration in TD (time domain):

http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...8082/#msg28082

and another illustration in FD (frequency domain):

http://australianelectronicgoldprosp...8090/#msg28090

To remove illustrated there convolution of targets impulse response h5(t) with impulse responses h4(t) and h6(t) of ground, should be used deconvolution software, suitable for metal detecting. The WEB contains a lot of information about deconvolution:

http://www.deconvolve.net/DNDownloads.html
http://www.bialith.com/
https://sites.google.com/site/ptadrous/

MATLAB and OCTAVE have a built-in function for deconvolution: deconv.

Sorry Mikebg, I will refrase that.....Meant to say the less capable. Competent i was refering in general terms. Not directed to anyone.

Like i have said before, I cannot get access to Doug's Forum after requesting to join 3 times......so i cannot view most links you have posted.

BTW, most technological advances in most Engineering fields, past and present have come out of Australia. And i am not talking about Metal Detecting technologies.

Cheers Sid

[Davor]

... This is terribly confusing the GB issue which turns out to be rather simple...

... and you are free to complicate to your heart's desire. Or not.

What became clear hereis that the ground exponent is exactly -1, and all other values from literature are merely quirks of measurement.

I like the Heisenberg's motto about measurements:

What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning.—Werner Karl Heisenberg

[Prospector_Al]

Crazy posts

Not crazy.........but who wants to reveal the ultimate GB system without it being wisked away and made legally their own?

Dont blame them all....Ferric toes, moodz, Al, Aziz etc...to name a few.

Every reason to keep the practical side of things under wrap. If its warranted then it will be posted.
For now....we just have wait, the less competent.

Cheers Sid

Hi Sid,

Thank you for your comments! It isn't obvious to everyone that different mambers have different reasons for being here. Some are hobbyists who are seeking information of technical nature which will help them to design a home-brew detector, but there are also those who are commercial developers who want to find out what the concerns of the potential users are.

There is dissatisfaction with the current crop of detectors and in an effort to satisfy the most urgent demands, it's helpful to keep a finger on the pulse (pun intended) on the detector world by monitoring the activity on the Forums.

The cryptic messages hint at what is possible, but detailed descriptions of the advances must wait until patent protection is in place.

Detecting can be frustrating, when the trash to nugget ratio is high. Hints at future improvement provide hope of better times ahead.

The issues seem to be ground balance, detection depth and discrimination against ferrous junk. As advances are made toward solving the problems, more cryptic messages may appear. An exchange of ideas provides some cross-fertilisation for those in the know--that's how technology advances.

That's the reason for scientific publications and the patenting system. You get a monopoly for a limited time, in exchange for advancing the "state of the art" by teaching everybody what you know.

You don't have to be crazy to be a detector designer, but it helps.

Allan

[Davor]

I like the crazy part, but be sure to strike out the patenting part - there is no such thing as protection in a patent that will ever work in the inventors' benefit. Too many people lost their time, money, families, lives ... everything - after filing a patent.

Patents are merely toys in the hands of big players, and they are extremely fussy about their toys.

See what patent did to bugwhiskers. That was some protection.

[Aziz]

Howdy,

look what happens, if you are the "World's most crazy metal detector designer".
I do have an ulti ultimate super-duper hyper negative IQ.
(see below )


BTW, I also have a complete cup/t-shirt series of my WBGB-saga. A WBGB-song too.

Aziz

[moodz]

... and you are free to complicate to your heart's desire. Or not.

What became clear hereis that the ground exponent is exactly -1, and all other values from literature are merely quirks of measurement.

I like the Heisenberg's motto about measurements:

What we observe is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning.—Werner Karl Heisenberg

....
As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.
Albert Einstein, "Geometry and Experience", January 27, 1921
US (German-born) physicist (1879 - 1955)