Adonis, new PI with discrimination?

[rob5]

What do you think about this detector?
http://www.titanium-system.com/
http://www.lefouilleur.com/adonis.jpg
PI with discrimination
USB and IRDA software update
Thanks

 

[Prospector Al]

The technology described is not really new. Nelson et al. in US Patent
6,853,194 describe a PI detector with stored signatures. Consequently, the Adonis detector probably can not be sold in the US.

The Adonis has some interesting features: The ability to download
additional target signatures, e.g. This capability may be necessitated by the fact there is a virtually unlimited number of
signatures presented by various targets and hot rocks.

A system such as this has a further limitation in that it works only when the signal amplitude is high enough to derive a signature. Typically, the ID depth is a small fraction of the detection depth. Thus, the deeper targets that require more effort to be unearthed can not be ID'd.

The Minelab GP-3000, which is also a PI detector with discrimination,
can only ID a target to about 1/4 of the detection depth. The disclaimers are typically: it works "if the target is not too deep or too small", or "if ground permits".

Time will tell if these limitations apply to the Adonis as well...

Prospector Al

 

[UK Brian]

This seems to be the machine that Gary in the U.K. was offered a demonstration of. When they turned up they did not have a working detector just plans/specifications and the offer that if he financed the development of the machine he could have sole U.K. distribution rights.

 

[Prospector Al]

For a translation of the French text on the Adonis web site, go to
"http://www.golddetector.info/other_detectors", and then click on the
file Adonis.htm on the list of detectors.

(The simplest way to do this is to use Edit > copy the text between the quotes and then paste the URL into the browser window. )

Prospector Al

 

[Prospector Al]

Hi rob5,
I don't see any responses to your request for information, so here's my two cent's worth:

I provided a translation of the text on the French web site and a few people have looked at it. I presume yo're among them, so you're in a
position to relate to what I'm saying...

The author is essentially right about the slow pace of improvements
coming from the major manufacturers. The effort is mainly focussed
on variations of displaying the data. ( I'm asking myself: Would I dig up a quarter, but not a penny? Do I care if it's two or three inches below the suface? Some pennies are worth more than a quarter and going a few inches deeper is trivial. Thus, these "advanced" displays are just fluff...) The basic flaws of the detectors remain
unchanged. I have reviewed over 80 patents which all claim to have
solved the problems with discrimination. Obviously, if only one of them had worked satisfactorily, the unending stream of innovative effort would have ceased.

Yet,the flow of new models continues unabated. One almost gets the idea that the manufacturers are "milking' the market, as is the case with cars and software upgrades.

Considering this situation, the effort to bring out something truly
revolutionary is laudable. However, in my opinion, the improvement will not come from added processing power, but rather from a more
thorough understanding of the physical phenomena that cause problems for metal detectors. If you were to go to a university library to get information about why "hot rocks" simulate metal targets, you would be very disappointed--no scientists seem to care...

The idea of storing signatures of targets is not new. A target can be
characterized by its reactive and resistive signal components. Unfortunately, the orientation of the target and the presence of magnetic minerals in the ground affects the magnitudes of these components, and the signatures are distorted accordingly.

To make a scheme using signatures to work reliably, the target signal must be considerably larger than the background signal. That's why
most User's Manuals advise you to "dig all signals".

The discrimination becomes unreliable before it fails altogether. Often, a coin-toss yields results as good as the detector.

With the above in mind, I would insist on a thorough demonstration before I invested any money in a detector venture, no matter how good
it sounded...

Yours truly,

Prospector Al

P.S. The "ultimate detector" will be designed by a physicist and not an electronics engineer. The physicist may ask the engineer to design
a few circuit, but electronics is just a tool...