TESORO GOLDEN SABRE

[Max]

is it a commercial device ?
- if so what's name/brand ?
- can find a coin on surface soil from meters away ?

- most important: what's physics operating principle ? (don't talk about patented stuff -application of principle- just physics)

- Artisanal device.

- No brand. Directional metal locator.

- Yes. Must be buried for X time. 1 inch depth (2-3 years). 40-50 cm depth (100 years). Red soil (ferrous) causes diminution in range and depth.

- The same of MD: electromagnetics.

Hi,
all nice but:

Still don't think possible coin detection on surface from meters away.

"Must be buried for X time. 1 inch depth (2-3 years). 40-50 cm depth (100 years). " ??????

Don't understand what kind of electromagnetic relationship could be with long time buried metals. Seems another LRL-argumentation.

If you mean halo effect that's not true for e.g. gold that doesn't create easy compounds in the sorrounding matrix. Just few ions in solution in the best case.

Also for other metals (e.g. copper, bronze) halo developing is not so marked up after first 2 years underground... just sorrounding cms of matrix are involved.
You can take it there even for 1000 or 3000 years... then found just a bit more halo than you find after 2 years! So why these 40-50 cm underground after 100years ? Impossible.

Kind regards,
Max

[Max]

"...."...What about depth with small (e.g. 8'') coils ?
Or put in other words, is GSabre more sensitive than PulseIB with similar dimension coil ?
No, of course not. TGS is superior."

YES, OF COURSE YES.TGS IS MUCH MORE SENSITIVE THAN PULSEIB!!!
How dare you to compare TGS with toy!?
Again i am very tired...dont know what reading and dont know what writing..!!?
English is not my language...so i always think on Serbian and try to answer on
English...!?
The way i put words in previous post is more like to confuse you than to answer!
Hah,hah,hah,hah!!!!
Go to sleep! Good night!

Hi ivconic,
yes, me too think GSabre is much ahead respect to other, even complicated, detectors. I got good results without any tuning at all, just connecting DD22 coil of bandidoII. Nice stuff... and seems that BF244 is a good solution if can't find BF245. I have both, but used 244 cause I'd like experiment a bit with circuit. Used B version, little pinch-off and it goes nice !

Also for me PulseIB can't compete with it, but I asked you cause of the tx signal shape, cause you know I don't built it so don't tested that Sasho Pulse IB detector, and just guess about depth gain.

Don't tested good disc (no time) but I've noticed totally ignores nails, all small iron stuff, even hammers!

Think also that better performances are partially due to higher voltages (+8/-6.2) than in bandidoII (+5/-3.2..-4).

Can't find jackdetect's stuff / schema now ! I'd like to take a look too.

Best regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi all,

I think that GoldenSabre reject at minimum so well small iron is cause of D-90 disc circuit settings present here, in older GSabre!

After 80's and introduction of Bandido they turned production to extended range of disc (ED-120 and ED-180) thus giving the ability to play more with disc... but giving charge to the user of right setting for e.g. nail rejection.

That's bad in some cases... e.g. when you don't want play with relics and only search "good" metals in junky sites.

So this would be D-90. Nice!
Infact: I've to turn 1/4 disc on bandidoII to gain same iron ignoring... damn!

This just need minimum! It's a nice detector this golden sabre, it's really worth!

Think that GoldenSabre Plus/GSabreII instead are ED-120 , anyone know for sure ???

Best regards,
Max

[Max]

CZ5 VCO SECTION

Hi ivconic,

you mean this ?

Seems possible to realize... but maybe 8038 is easier to do respect this.

Note the rotative selector: different inputs for different audio purposes.

Best regards,
Max

PS: do you see where there is D0, D1, D2 ? Audio stage is in syncro with sampler (MAX333) to avoid jitter... that way it get tones for successive operations in the VCO... kind of a mixer.

[Max]

enhanced replacements for LM308 ?

Hi all,
I was thinking at some better replacements for lm308 (very old now, if you haven't or if you burn stuff you'll have to use TL081 !? Why ???)

Ok TL081 works good there, I've tested myself, that's fine.

BUT I'm thinking now at:

LF351 (obsolete too but still easy to find somewhere)
and then voilla !

OP07 ! now very cheap too, find almost in everyplace! I have to try.
If you have too, try it instead of LM308... and give here some feedback.

I think circuit will stay even more stable !

At the end it'll become a ROCK! I'm sure !

Kind regards,
Max

[nelson]

Hi Max. About this..."Some small "cracks" in audio with TL062, then replaced with TLC2262 cracks disappeared."...what are pins connections? are this the same has TLC2262? This cause i have the same problem with a few crack on audio.

Best regards

Nelson

Hi all,
tested for just 30minutes (no time, DAMN!).

My actual recipe (a bit modified from original) is like this...

used (for now):

- 4xBF244B in middle section (sampler) instead of BF245C (changed pinout of to-92)
- 2xBF245C in battery checker and osc section
- 1xLF353 as preamp (but tested others)
- used 2N3904/2N3906 instead of 2N2222/2N2907
- 1xTLC2262 instead of TL062
- 1xC517 (not BC, but it's the same stuff, pinout etc)
- 1x8ohm speaker

Freq. 14.37 Khz
+V 8V (regulated by 7808 )
-V -6.12 V

Work good without any tuning! COOL!

1eur coin at 27cms in air using DD22. Pretty cool !

Really motion detector! Nice.

Weak audio... as always!

Some small "cracks" in audio with TL062, then replaced with TLC2262 cracks disappeared.

Disc work too but have no time to play with now (maybe next week).

Best regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi Max. About this..."Some small "cracks" in audio with TL062, then replaced with TLC2262 cracks disappeared."...what are pins connections? are this the same has TLC2262? This cause i have the same problem with a few crack on audio.

Best regards

Nelson

Hi Nelson,
I've tested untill now:

TL062
TL072
TL082
TLC2262

First 3 almost the same... changes nothing... well 062 is a bit more unstable than others two (that seem exactly the same, can't note any difference) but really few. All they are from STMicro.

Then also used TLC2262 and things are more stable, I've admit.

TLC2262 is from Texas Instruments. Have better noise figure. Same pinout of TL062.

I saw LF442 on original schematic so changed that thing to figure out how to suit better. If you have LF442 try this, or buy TLC2262.

"This cause i have the same problem with a few crack on audio"

To me happened just at maximum sens in all-metal.

This fact could depend also by other things... not just less noise in TL062 place. For example another hot spot here is preamplifier:

I've used LF353 but tested TL082, TLC2262 also here... but there are problems cause 353 has real particular jfet inputs... so it's a bit critical to change and save performance.

BTW have you used BF245C ?

Best regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi Max. About this..."Some small "cracks" in audio with TL062, then replaced with TLC2262 cracks disappeared."...what are pins connections? are this the same has TLC2262? This cause i have the same problem with a few crack on audio.

Best regards

Nelson

Nelson have you removed flux , right ?

Flux removal is mandatory in this kind of stuff.

[Unregistered]

How do you remouve the flux MAX?
Its look like TGS have made you crazy like us.

[Max]

How do you remouve the flux MAX?
Its look like TGS have made you crazy like us.

Hi
are you Nihil ? Still playing with flux ?

I always remove flux, even if not required.
In any VLF detectors you have to do. And is always good practice.

Or you play with toys and LRLs ???

I use solvents, brush and also cotton (depends) for little things like GS.

I found that best to do is a bit more complicated (but extremely good for smd):

ultrasonic wash in solvents but taking care that upper side of circuit is not involved. Surface waves remove all residual flux... but problem is that once used you can't reuse same solvent, and you need much so it's not indicated in a single homemade pcb work like this.

Solvents are mostly: tert-butyl alcohol, isopropilic alcohol, acetone (but not so good for copper), trichloroethylene (more toxic of others).

All are good using ultrasonic waves... but if you treat also top layer you'll lose ic numbers... have some plastic melt

You have to use a suspend "bridge" to avoid immersion of board for more than 1mm in solvent.

For GSabre I've not used ultrasonic cleaning but just trichloroethylene some cotton and a tothbrush(outside) (and a Clint Eastwood's cigar , of course).

Best regards,
Max

PS: here is an example of bad flux removal (or no-flux-removal at all???)
another mineoro's masterpiece: ENJOY

[Nihil Roma Maius]

Max, sorry.

I'm not the unregistered!

[Max]

Max, sorry.

I'm not the unregistered!

Hi,
sorry for the mistake... I always exchange you also for Esteban and Hung...
now also unregistered! Damn !

Maybe are that damn cigars ! Kind of a fog and can't see things right way!

Best regards,
Max

[Max]

Hi,
still more puzzled now... so who is Unregistered that was lost in space with GSabre ???

For real ??? How ?
Everything works on my homemade ! Used also different stuff !

Unregistered ,c'mon hit the table... if you are here!
Or register... make us this GIFT!

Best regards,
Max

[tiktak]

Hi

Hi,
Max.
I personaly remouved flux with sharp ithem and make shore that there have no connection betwen the elements.Is this good?
I still cant get good results!
I desided to use wire from my first coil/because now dont have other wire/
And use small d!
But wondering which to use?
I have several configurations that I can see here for DD 22 cm!
Which to use?
DD22 cm:
Former d=?
Outer d=?
Tx turns=?
Rx turns=?
wire 0,30 mm with varnish.
Thanks
p.s.I have used TL082 insted of LF353.Try TL072,but no differance.Now will order LF353.
But my probleme must be coil.
Thanks

[nelson]

Sorry for my poor english, what is flux?
Regards
Nelson

Nelson have you removed flux , right ?

Flux removal is mandatory in this kind of stuff.