ML patent Application

[dougAEGPF]

Doug, you use what you want to use in the way of a detector. I would like to bring to the readers attention statements made by DougAEGPF as Doug on his previous forum.... GoldProspectingInOz......



Yes, I think that is a reasonable representation, Doug!

Now Doug, I found this next quote from you on your old GoldProspectingInOz forum quite interesting.....



So, really Doug, who were you addressing in that forum post conversation, and who are you trying to deceive now??

My statements are true (but from many years ago!!) just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!!
dougAEGPF

[UrbanFox]

I wouldn't class a test site as being homogenous. Either targets are placed into location which means the ground is over turned and no-longer uniform in structure or composition, or the site already had known targets which at some stage would have been dug to prove they are nugget's and once again the ground is no-longer uniform in structure or composition.

Or, the targets are placed in holes made by drilling horizontally into a creek bank. The soil between the target and coil is therefore not over turned.

[dougAEGPF]

I wouldn't class a test site as being homogenous. Either targets are placed into location which means the ground is over turned and no-longer uniform in structure or composition, or the site already had known targets which at some stage would have been dug to prove they are nugget's and once again the ground is no-longer uniform in structure or composition.

True! Indeed some damage has been caused at the test sites from people digging ground noises!!!!!!! The sites are definitely not homogenous!!! Other than the original boring for the pipes the ground is undisturbed (their has been some erosion from high creekflows) at least since the 1850's!
dougAEGPF

[dougAEGPF]

The patent mainly applies to pi designs that sample early where excess metal in the coil housing will respond as if moving relative to the coil when the coil passes over certain rocks and ground.

What are the Electromagnetic characteristics of these certain rocks and ground?
dougAEGPF

[UrbanFox]

My statements are true (but from many years ago!!) just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!!
dougAEGPF

Doug, you are attempting to deceive today's reader by misrepresentation.

Here again is your statement, DougAEGPF, from your GoldProspectingInOz forum.....

"Come out here and I am sure that we will be only to happy to demonstrate how the TDI,Gs5B.Infinium etc just cannot detect many, many nuggets (including some shallow one's) that any ML can. Its a fact of life easily demonstrable at the test site or in the field.
Doug "

[dougAEGPF]

Doug, you are attempting to deceive today's reader by misrepresentation.

Here again is your statement, DougAEGPF, from your GoldProspectingInOz forum.....

"Come out here and I am sure that we will be only to happy to demonstrate how the TDI,Gs5B.Infinium etc just cannot detect many, many nuggets (including some shallow one's) that any ML can. Its a fact of life easily demonstrable at the test site or in the field.
Doug "

No deception!The truth just as this is the truth "------ just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!! " painful as it must be for you to accept! This has also been proved in the field on some VIRGIN nuggets detected in normal timings but gave NO signal in FG/SS/E!!!!! Some of these larger ,flatter nuggets will only give a signal when they are lying on their edge in SS/FG/E but NOT when lying flat.Perhaps you can provide us with an explanation for this?
dougAEGPF

[UrbanFox]

------ just as the disastrous loss of depth that the smooth timings can cause on some long TC nuggets!!
dougAEGPF

So, don't use smooth timings....use normal timing if normal timing gives better depth and sensitivity. If ground conditions preclude the use of normal timing because of noise, etc, then use a smooth timing. Sure you might not get the depth that normal timings will give when in good ground.

But Doug, you detail to the reader when they would need to use those timings and why. You might as well say the depth loss can be 100% if the detector is not switched on.

It must really get at you, Doug, that Minelab detectors are the detector of choice for around 100% of serious prospectors in Australia. Would you like to explain why that is so Doug?? Sour grapes and jealousy are a curse, aren't they Doug.

[Davor]

Minelab detectors are the detector of choice for around 100% of serious prospectors in Australia.

And so is Lada the car of choice of serious men and women in Russia. Competition sucks

[Davor]

The type of ferrite obviously matters, especially with CW designs, but it obviously doesn't alter the balance on a mono coil!!

The patent mainly applies to pi designs that sample early where excess metal in the coil housing will respond as if moving relative to the coil when the coil passes over certain rocks and ground. You can test a few short length of soldered wires by passing them over a properly made coil. If the PI responds then a coil with similar joins will have you digging false signals in highly mineralised ground.

I think Carl is talking about using ferrite to rebalance a coil? Not the same thing.

Sure there is no problem with balancing a mono, however excess metal must move against a coil to become detectable. Good luck finding anything with a coil with moving entrails! In case all the poorly welded joins with excess metal on them is used, there will be a minuscule rise in response, but a cyclostationary rise with no consequence for detection. To be able to deteriorate noise you'd need something noisy, which soldering alloys are not. The relaxing magnetic domains are noisy, and the effect is called the Barkhausen effect. Ferrite is not known for Barkhausen effect, but is prone to saturation. This saturation is prone to modulation with earth field, acting as a magnetic amplifier.

[UrbanFox]

[QUOTE=Davor;169161]excess metal must move against a coil to become detectable. Good luck finding anything with a coil with moving entrails! In case all the poorly welded joins with excess metal on them is used, there will be a minuscule rise in response, but a cyclostationary rise with no consequence for detection. To be able to deteriorate noise you'd need something noisy, which soldering alloys are not.QUOTE]

Sorry Davor. You are wrong.

http://www.geotech1.com/forums/showt...919#post168919

[Davor]

Sorry Davor. You are wrong.

No, I'm not.
On the better thought, yes, I think ML needs a lot of ferrite in their coils. It will surely make them immensely better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BY7WFyCVO_A

[UrbanFox]

No, I'm not.

Oh yes you are!!

[Aziz]

[QUOTE=dougAEGPF;169171]

Would you like to explain why that is so Doug??

Simple!Most forums are de facto ML forums and ML's massive propaganda and spin campaign in all forms of the media and ML's use of it legal muscle/financial resources and using the patent system to kill off any competitors even when NO infringement of ML's patents or IP has been PROVEN beyond ALL reasonable doubt in the appropriate jurisdiction! Then of course forum pro ML fanatics use the web to ruthlessly attack,discredit,propagate lies about, harass or even threaten (threats of violence against me for example!!) those trying to bring a new competitive detector to market or have the courage to challenge ML's spin or their patents or dare question their corporate ethics!
dougAEGPF

Truly well said Doug!

I can imagine having another hobby:
Analysing patent-trolls patents and providing prior art, bypass solutions, proving the obvious theft, ...

Aziz

[Qiaozhi]

Simple!Most forums are de facto ML forums and ML's massive propaganda and spin campaign in all forms of the media and ML's use of it legal muscle/financial resources and using the patent system to kill off any competitors even when NO infringement of ML's patents or IP has been PROVEN beyond ALL reasonable doubt in the appropriate jurisdiction! Then of course forum pro ML fanatics use the web to ruthlessly attack,discredit,propagate lies about, harass or even threaten (threats of violence against me for example!!) those trying to bring a new competitive detector to market or have the courage to challenge ML's spin or their patents or dare question their corporate ethics!
dougAEGPF

Truly well said Doug!

I can imagine having another hobby:
Analysing patent-trolls patents and providing prior art, bypass solutions, proving the obvious theft, ...

Aziz

Gentlemen - may I remind you that the Geotech forums are for discussions on "The Technology of Treasure Hunting", as it states quite clearly under the big Geotech logo at the top of the page?

They are NOT to be used for Minelab bashing, or for the bashing of any other metal detector company for that matter. I think everyone here (except those who are taking part in this nonsense) are thoroughly fed up with this continued rhetoric. Please cease, or I will start removing the offending posts. If you find it difficult to stop then take it elsewhere to one of the other forums where they tolerate this sort of behaviour.

I know that Carl suggested simply ignoring the arguments if you don't want to read them, but this could only be acceptable if it was kept to one particular area entitled [perhaps] "The Wingeing and Whining Thread", in the Off-Topic Forum. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and the same arguments keep appearing in some otherwise very interesting threads that eventually get dragged down into the gutter, consequently destroying any attempt at a sensible discussion.

So - come on guys - get your act together!

[Ferric Toes]

Let's get back to the theme of this thread as, like times before, threads get into a free wheeling mode and self destruct. Minelab have a particular problem in that their coil design relies on a very low resistance winding and cable. This means that the equivalent wire gauge is quite low (16AWG?). Joining the coil wire to the coax by means of an overlapped solder joint is impossible to do without producing, even with care, a blob that is detectable. I have just done it with a ML coil and ML cable. The coil is the TX half of a dud 11in DD now used as a mono and connected to my PI viscosity meter to give a digital readout of signal values.. The single joint is detectable at the centre of the coil at 10uS. Bring it close to the winding and the signal is strong. Put a ferrite sleeve over the joint and signal disappears. Place the joint in the centre of the coil to get a signal; pass a piece of solid magnetite rock over it at about 1/2in and the signal increases. Place joint on the coil winding and the magnetite causes the signal to decrease - just what you would expect from the different field directions and what the proximity of a permiable object would do. So for ML low resistance coils, the type of cable they use and where the cable/coil joins are positioned, the ferrite sleeve appears to have value.

Are there other ways of achieving this without the use of ferrite sleeves? First thing is to position the joins (solder blobs) away from the coil centre and upwards from the coil winding. I used a 2in long plastic extension at the position where the coil leadout and strain relief is. The join is in this extension which is then 2in above the TX coil winding. This is sufficient distance for the solder blob to be almost out of range of any modulation by the most aggressive "hot" rocks.

Another way is to split the joins as shown in the picture. Comparing the signals at 10uS delay the split join gives 1/20th the signal of a full join. The fact that there are now 4 joins instead of 2 makes little difference.

For normal PI use this whole thing is a bit academic, but if you are wanting to get below 10uS to, say, 5uS delay then at the shorter delay it will become important. However I would not be using heavy coil wire and cable, but something much lighter and with very much smaller joints. As I have mentioned before, the more important feature of short delays for small gold, is the big increase in viscous ground signal

By the way, I have used large half pot cores on which to design a detector that has the detection field just on one face. This was a industrial design that had mechanical moving parts behind the coil, and to prevent modulation by them. Also behind the pot core was the electronics and cable joins so that these were not detectable. One application was for companies cutting up chipboard, so as to prevent damage to the saw on bits of chopped up nails and wire that get into the raw material. Also, a head of this construction was made as a small coil for detecting beneath wire fences. The pot core in a metal box that I mentioned a couple of days ago was a real project, in case anyone thought I was being frivolous. Had to bolt a sensor on a railway line to count the number of wheels that went past on a freight train. Just a half pot core peeping out through a hole in an aluminium box, to prevent detection of the rail it was bolted too. Now there is a question - why would anyone want to count wheels on a moving train?


Comparison of Bifurcated Joint Technology with Single Joint Technology

Eric.