A
Anonymous
Guest
[No message]
Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
A
Anonymous
Guest
To translate that into American,it worked! NOW, will it cook beans 'n hotdogs?
TW
TW
A
Anonymous
Guest
What are you doing USING AA batteries, trying to cause a surplus of C and D batteries?
TW
TW
A
Anonymous
Guest
Use a reference, like a .177 BB next to it.
TW
TW
A
Anonymous
Guest
Have you decided about putting both motion/ non-motion modes in same unit as we discussed?
TW
TW
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi Eric,
I think Beachcomber and myself have touched on this subject before, Some fresh water lakes are so heavily mineralized to the point the Excal/Sovereign or VLF detectors won't operate well. This is were a Pi can penetrate these mineralized lakes with ease, Both my friend Denny and I use a Pi at this particular lake here in California as were VLF units including the famous Excal can't operate. California gold country lakes are tough on the BBS units, It takes a Pi to penetrate these lakes.
After a year of heavy pounding from us using the Pi's the lake has less iron signals so this coming year in a few months the iron ratio will be much lower than the beginning of last years season.
HH, Paul (Ca)
I think Beachcomber and myself have touched on this subject before, Some fresh water lakes are so heavily mineralized to the point the Excal/Sovereign or VLF detectors won't operate well. This is were a Pi can penetrate these mineralized lakes with ease, Both my friend Denny and I use a Pi at this particular lake here in California as were VLF units including the famous Excal can't operate. California gold country lakes are tough on the BBS units, It takes a Pi to penetrate these lakes.
After a year of heavy pounding from us using the Pi's the lake has less iron signals so this coming year in a few months the iron ratio will be much lower than the beginning of last years season.
HH, Paul (Ca)
A
Anonymous
Guest
Asbolutely, I'm not criticizing. Just worried of the implications.. <img src="/metal/html/smile.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt="
">
">
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi Luca,
The thing is, that if a machine like my 5uS PI should come on the market, I would make the pulse delay adjustable. The prototype is adjustable between 5 and 15 microseconds, so a user could excercise discretion regarding how short a delay to use in any given situation. Some areas would be too littered with tiny metal fragments to warrant using 5uS. Indeed some users may not wish to search for ear ring studs and fine link chains. It is important though, that the choice is there.
Eric.
The thing is, that if a machine like my 5uS PI should come on the market, I would make the pulse delay adjustable. The prototype is adjustable between 5 and 15 microseconds, so a user could excercise discretion regarding how short a delay to use in any given situation. Some areas would be too littered with tiny metal fragments to warrant using 5uS. Indeed some users may not wish to search for ear ring studs and fine link chains. It is important though, that the choice is there.
Eric.
Prospector Al
New member
Howdy, This is an old thread, but I found it by looking for "invisible nuggets". Invisible to a PI detector, that is. Unfortunately, the pictures associated with the post have also become invisible...I would really like to get hold of a nugget of this kind--for testing a detector that I've modified for improved vision.
I'll pay good money for such a nugget, If it has a good pedigree, i.e. not found with a PI detector, or a nugget that is detectable at a much closer range than a "normal" nugget of similar size...
Prospector Al
I'll pay good money for such a nugget, If it has a good pedigree, i.e. not found with a PI detector, or a nugget that is detectable at a much closer range than a "normal" nugget of similar size...
Prospector Al
Hi Al,
You might post over on the nuggethunting or nuggetshooter forum and ask for John B. The nuggets that were displayed and used for testing came from him. He found them SE of Tucson near Greaterville with his White's VLF and then he verified they couldn't be detected with a Minelab PI.
Reg
You might post over on the nuggethunting or nuggetshooter forum and ask for John B. The nuggets that were displayed and used for testing came from him. He found them SE of Tucson near Greaterville with his White's VLF and then he verified they couldn't be detected with a Minelab PI.
Reg
Prospector Al
New member
Hi All,
Some kind of test is needed to determine just how "invisible" a nugget is...Some may be just difficult to detetect and not totally invisble. A comparison with a standard target would be of value, and to this end, I'm proposing to use a piece of a chewing gum wrapper.
Take a Wrigley's chewing gum wrapper and smooth it out. Then, fold it in half, length-wise, and tear it along the folding line. You are left with a piece that is about 1 3/4" square. The distance at which this target can be detected is a measure of how well a detector responds to targets with short time constants, and a comparison between the gum wrapper and a nugget is a relative measure of "invisibility".
(This is much like the "Nickel Test", quoted by many, except that a nickel has a time constant that is about ten times longer...)
I would be extatic if I heard from some of you who had performed this test on their detectors, and delirious with joy if I could get my hands on a nugget that performed worse than the gum wrapper.
P. Al
Some kind of test is needed to determine just how "invisible" a nugget is...Some may be just difficult to detetect and not totally invisble. A comparison with a standard target would be of value, and to this end, I'm proposing to use a piece of a chewing gum wrapper.
Take a Wrigley's chewing gum wrapper and smooth it out. Then, fold it in half, length-wise, and tear it along the folding line. You are left with a piece that is about 1 3/4" square. The distance at which this target can be detected is a measure of how well a detector responds to targets with short time constants, and a comparison between the gum wrapper and a nugget is a relative measure of "invisibility".
(This is much like the "Nickel Test", quoted by many, except that a nickel has a time constant that is about ten times longer...)
I would be extatic if I heard from some of you who had performed this test on their detectors, and delirious with joy if I could get my hands on a nugget that performed worse than the gum wrapper.
P. Al
Prospector Al
New member
Hi Reg,
Thanks for the suggestion. That's EXACTLY the kind of nugget I'd like to get my hands on...
Best,
P. Al
Thanks for the suggestion. That's EXACTLY the kind of nugget I'd like to get my hands on...
Best,
P. Al
Hi Al,
The nuggets were called "invisible" because they were invisible to PI's normally used for nugget hunting. None of the ML's would detect them, even though the size of the gold was such that one would have thought the nuggets should have been detected. John Blennert used to have fun with them betting ML owners if they could detect them.
now, some of these nuggets were reasonably large, maybe 1/2" or more in diameter. A few were even greater than that.
I received two from John that I used for testing. These nuggets were about 1/4 to 1/3 of an inch in diameter and together they could not be detected. When looking at the signal from them, I could see the signal was gone by 10 usec. At the time my PI was sampling at just less than 10 usec and I could barely get a signal if I rubbed the nuggets across the bottom of the coil.
It was these nuggets that inspired me to search for a way to shorten the delay even more. With Eric's help, I was able to shorten the delay enough that the "invisible" nuggets became "visible".
Changing the subject, how is your coil design working out?
Reg
The nuggets were called "invisible" because they were invisible to PI's normally used for nugget hunting. None of the ML's would detect them, even though the size of the gold was such that one would have thought the nuggets should have been detected. John Blennert used to have fun with them betting ML owners if they could detect them.
now, some of these nuggets were reasonably large, maybe 1/2" or more in diameter. A few were even greater than that.
I received two from John that I used for testing. These nuggets were about 1/4 to 1/3 of an inch in diameter and together they could not be detected. When looking at the signal from them, I could see the signal was gone by 10 usec. At the time my PI was sampling at just less than 10 usec and I could barely get a signal if I rubbed the nuggets across the bottom of the coil.
It was these nuggets that inspired me to search for a way to shorten the delay even more. With Eric's help, I was able to shorten the delay enough that the "invisible" nuggets became "visible".
Changing the subject, how is your coil design working out?
Reg
Prospector Al
New member
Hi Reg,
Thanks for the info. I find all that very interesting. No doubt, there are a lot of nuggets out there, waiting to be found by a detector with better "vision". I'll be able to tell you how my coil design worked out, as soon as I get hold of one of these nuggets. I'll make a post on the nuggetfinder forum. I'm hoping JohnB will get back to me and sell me one of those nuggets...
P. Al
Thanks for the info. I find all that very interesting. No doubt, there are a lot of nuggets out there, waiting to be found by a detector with better "vision". I'll be able to tell you how my coil design worked out, as soon as I get hold of one of these nuggets. I'll make a post on the nuggetfinder forum. I'm hoping JohnB will get back to me and sell me one of those nuggets...
P. Al
Hi Al,
I thought I had posted the most logical sites to get in touch with John B.
He frequents the Nuggetshooter forum a lot and the nuggethunting forum quite a bit also.
Here are the links:
http://www.nuggetshooter.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=fccf89d26db90aef82eb38a8e04eafdc&showforum=1
http://www.nuggethunting.com/forums/index.php?s=594b70c074d169cea8b10e722f1a1e44&showforum=1
You can email him from them also. He goes by John B.
Reg
I thought I had posted the most logical sites to get in touch with John B.
He frequents the Nuggetshooter forum a lot and the nuggethunting forum quite a bit also.
Here are the links:
http://www.nuggetshooter.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=fccf89d26db90aef82eb38a8e04eafdc&showforum=1
http://www.nuggethunting.com/forums/index.php?s=594b70c074d169cea8b10e722f1a1e44&showforum=1
You can email him from them also. He goes by John B.
Reg
Prospector Al
New member
Thanks Reg, I sent a PM to John--we'll see what happens...
Gulf Hunter
Active member
Is is applicable or will it be applicable to my Gold Quest Aquasearch A2? Will send it out to Mr.Bill for an update. Almost got the signal on a fine gold chain this weekend. Had just recovered the necklace medallion and was intently listening for any sign of the chain. Had a broken low tone, but lost it in the recovery process. Should have just dove down and fanned the hole out. I know there has got to be a ton of these chains in our waters, but can't get a read on them, due to their poor signal properties. Waters kinda murky down here.
Hi Eric,
Have you firmed up the ability of the 5-15 range for PI use primarily?
Did you have input for the design of the DetectorPro PI unit and is it maybe
getting to the point of being possible old tech since it's a 15 us unit.
Does it take more power to use a faster pulse at 5 us than 10 us?
Thanks,
John
Have you firmed up the ability of the 5-15 range for PI use primarily?
Did you have input for the design of the DetectorPro PI unit and is it maybe
getting to the point of being possible old tech since it's a 15 us unit.
Does it take more power to use a faster pulse at 5 us than 10 us?
Thanks,
John