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

Iron Discrimination

A

Anonymous

Guest
This one is for Eric and the other circuit guru's.
I have an interesting idea as to how to accurately identify iron with a PI. Start with a master oscillator and divide it by 7 in a first divider and divide the inverted oscillator signal by 9. Use the divide by seven output signal to transmit positive going pulses and the divide by nine output signal to transmit negative pulses from the same coil. The pulses would both be generated on the positive edges of of the dividers outputs. Due to its hysteresis, an iron target will have a non linear response. This will cause a beat frequency to be generated in the receiver equal to the difference of the two frequencies. eg: For an oscillator running at 10 KHz then the transmit frequencies are 1,111.1Hz for the divide by nine and 1,428.5 Hz for the divide by seven. Notice that the pulses cannot collide with the ratios shown. The beat frequency will then be 317.4 Hz. A band pass filter can be used to seperate the beat frequency in the receiver. The presence of the beat frequency would indicate an iron target. A conductive target such as a coin will provide very little, if any energy at the beat frequency. The amplitude of the beat frequency signal could be compared if required to the amplitude response of a standard PI sample taken from either the positive or the negative channel. The ratio would permit one to determine a conductive target with a small non linearity such as a coin right under the search-head or a piece of jewelry to a weak iron signal buried way down deep. Another interesting idea is to sum the beat frequency signal from the bandpass filter into the receivers audio. This will provide a dual audio response. The presence of the 317.4Hz beat tone would let you know that you were detecting iron. Hmmm, could this be improved upon? As is, this will be a most useful feature for a PI. I still get the feeling though that this is just scratching the surface of the problem! Let's get our thinking caps on and see where we can go from here. Any ideas? Dave. * * *
 
Hi dave
I havn't a clue about the technical side of PI's I just use them, the big drawback is IRON, I use a Goldquest and because it finds targets at amazing depths, only to find a small scrap of iron is annoying to say the least.
I am approaching 70 and have been using Erics PI's since 1981 my back is now paying the price, so if you can come up with a way of telling ferrous from non-ferrous I for one would be eternally grateful.
H H Bob UK
 
Bob,
I am originaly from Ashford Middlesex (not Kent) England. I married a girl from the colonies here and now live in Charlotte North Carolina. I will wait until the expert (Eric Foster) has a chance to evaluate the idea before I accept your thanks. Eric as you know is the best PI engineer in the world. He also has the manufacturing ability required to produce such a machine. If he likes the idea he has my blessing to develop and produce it as a product. I had my math wizard at work check out the theory for me. Two hours later, he came into my office brandishing an armful of computer generated graphs. He had concluded that the method would indeed work. As he has yet to be wrong on anything in the seven years that I have employed him, my guess is that the method will be 100% OK. Still, I will await Eric's word on the method. There is always a chance that something was overlooked. I was just in England a few weeks ago. I went detecting just once on a farm. This was a meeting which was advertized in one of the treasure hunting mags. My wife and I layed down ten pounds each to participate. There were many good finds made during the day. These included a gold stater which was worth about eight hundred pounds. There were also a number of early roman coins sporting the letters SC. (for American readers, this does not mean South Carolina) Add to this a sprinkling of hammered silver and you get the idea that the site was not to bad. I detected only one good signal all day. This turned out to be a 1912 gold half soveriegn. I was a little upset as I wanted an earlier find! Oh well, what can I tell you? My wife emerged from the day with about twenty shot gun shell brasses and a handful of British .303 calibre bullets and cartridge cases. I would love to know how you make out on your sites. We get to visit about once a year for about three weeks. I would love an e-mail from you so as to get an idea of how British beach sites etc produce. My e-mail address is pan @trellis.net All he best, Dave. * * *
 
Hi-Dave, I trust that when you and your wife were detecting in the rally sites in england, you were not using PI machines, what!- machines were you using to find all the goodies you mentioned,???
 
Terry, I don't think that just one coin and a collection of cartridge cases etc makes the case fo "ALL those Goodies". I must admit that the coin being a half sovereign made it much more bearable though. The gold stater and the Roman coins seemed to all have been found by people using Minelab equipment. I saw a lot of Soveriegn's being used. My guess is that the Minelabs did so well due to their ability to detect good targets next to iron. The site was infested with iron which threw our aged Tesoro Silver Sabre and a 1265X into fits. These two old machines were taken to England by us years ago and are left in storage at my mothers house.
 
Hi Dave,
Re your post;
http://www.findmall.com/read.php?34,127762,127762#msg-127762

I am very surprised that there was such little feedback to this novel approach. There's something I'm missing though :huh:
With this clocking scheme are you not limited to a maximum 50us Tx pulse?
And, what is the criteria for selecting the non-colliding frequencies, are any unrelated harmonics and fundamentals that provide an audio range beat note sufficient?

If the master clock were 5kHz and divided by 3 and 5 (both prime) would the extra pulse width help or would the reduced PRR negate any benefits? These latter questions are only rhetorical really, because I should get to work and find these answers myself, but have I understood the theory right, that's all I need to know?

Any enlightenment gratefully accepted.
Regards
kev.
 
Are you using an old Goldquest or a newer model with SAT ? I love the Goldquest SS and Eric upgraded my Deepstar with the power saving switch and added the SAT to that and if set mid way it certainly helps me I.D. the iron by making the target width to audio response stand out.
Testing the Sovereign with Sunray 12", WOT 15" and Detech Penetrator 14" a few weeks ago on a site where the sea washed away a medieval village (and a few Roman coins have turned up) little turned up of interest though I searched in either all metal or minimum discrim. A return with the Deepstar (11.5"coil) produced one small Roman bronze and four Georgian coins. So light to use, no mode switching, a pleasure to use. Digging some iron and a few really deep fishing weights was a bit of a pain but the weight of the Minelab and that horrible audio somehow takes the pleasure out of detecting.
(Did keep the Detech though!)
 
That's ok the forum is doing what it should do with the post, if you have the "float-to-top" enabled in your preferences set.

Mr. Bill
 
Kev, The post I Made was one day off being exactly five years from when I first posted it to when you reposted it!!!

The method worked well but I went off on a tangent toward PIB or Pulse Induction Balance methods which I am still involved with. I really needed to make a lot more tests than I did at the time in order to more fully evaluate the method. I would love it if you and others experimented with it and posted your results for everyone to see.

The 50 uS is not the limit of such a detection system. It is simply half the period of the 10 kHz clock. If you lower the clock in one example. You can make the pulses wider. This also lowers the beat frequency. Much longer pulses can however be used if you wish to use them for long TC targets such as silver coins.

Tuned circuits, active filters, a PLL or a switched capacitor comb filter can be used to tune the beat frequency. A lower beat frequency can be used without any problems at all if you filter it and demodulate it properly.

Some possible beat frequencies for 10 kHz:

2,3: 1667 Hz
3,4: 833 Hz
3,5: 1333 Hz
2,5: 3000 Hz
4,5: 500 Hz
5,6: 333 Hz
6,7: 238 Hz
5,7: 571 Hz

The iron gets magnetized by each pulse, an example of the state of its magnetization versus time looks like this:
1000000011100000111110001111111011111111100000001110000011111000...

For detecting explosive mines it is a requirement that the magnetic field averages to zero. To do this you can make the more frequent pulses narrower. So in the case of nine and seven pulses, if the seven pulses are 50 uS, the nine pulses are adjusted to 39uS.

Kev, are you in Kiwi? You can write to me directly at: devilbat@bellsouth.net if you wish. I will be leaving the USA for England (where I am originally from) on August 30th and I will not be back until September 18th. I will not have access to email during this time.

All the very best, Dave. * * *

 
Thankyou Dave,
I'm going to look into this, and I will share what I find interesting. Perhaps this technique combined with a PIB (sampling during Tx on) may increase it's effectiveness. I find the idea of taking advantage of iron's hysteresis to knock it out, compelling, as it also must be related to the magnetic viscosity of the object and surrounding ground.

I think I'll try 5kHz divided by 2 and 3 first, it might give more pulse interlaced information, since the divide by 7 & 9 left large gaps between the fast polarising pulses, but this may have been advantageous, will need to find out to be sure. Also when looking at the pulse streams I realised that which ever one arrives first, either negative or positive, this needs to be the shorter one of the two (half master clk period) and the next pulse in that clock period can be as long as the modulus of that channel allows.

Yep I'm a Kiwi from New Zealand, lost my Yorkshire accent now (emigrated young) still fond of England though.....

Take care.
Regards
Kev
 
Kev,

I left England for the USA when I was exactly 20 1/2 years old. I am now 54 so I have lived longer in the USA than in England.

OK on trying the PI-HBF (Hysteresis Beat Frequency) method. It does indeed work but it needs looking at more closely.

The PIB method works very well. I have a fully variable discrimination control on my Pulse Devil PIB detector that works exactly like a VLF detectors discrimination control. There is also a Ground Balance control which again works the same as the GB control on a VLF.

Good luck on the bench. I will really be looking forward to reading about your results. After reading your past posts it seems to me that you are more than qualified to determine if the method is viable or not.

All the very best, Dave. * * *

 
The idea of using hysteresis to differentiate between ferrous and non-ferrous targets has been tried and patented. I've tried it myself, and its works.

There is one problem: The sensitivity of the method is directly proportional to the width of the hysteresis loop. It is known to metallurgists that annealing with dramatically reduce the coercive force of iron or steel and thus minimize the hysteresis.

As a consequence, targets like nails that were part of a building that burned down will be identified as non-ferrous targets. Apart from this, the method works well. It will also discriminate between "hot rocks" and non-ferrous targets. The rocks that exhibit "viscous" signals also have hysteresis.

Despite the known problems, the method could possibly be improved...

Prospector_Al
 
Prospector_Al said:
The idea of using hysteresis to differentiate between ferrous and non-ferrous targets has been tried and patented. I've tried it myself, and its works.

There is one problem: The sensitivity of the method is directly proportional to the width of the hysteresis loop. It is known to metallurgists that annealing with dramatically reduce the coercive force of iron or steel and thus minimize the hysteresis.

As a consequence, targets like nails that were part of a building that burned down will be identified as non-ferrous targets. Apart from this, the method works well. It will also discriminate between "hot rocks" and non-ferrous targets. The rocks that exhibit "viscous" signals also have hysteresis.

Despite the known problems, the method could possibly be improved...

Prospector_Al

I should correct the above: A Patent Application for a : "Hybrid-Technology Metal Detector" has been filed already. But that's only half the battle.
Prosecuting an application often takes more time and money than filing the application. Whether or not the next step is worth the trouble depends on the test results, and that's what I'm trying to determine at this time.
 
September 2008 - Allan Westersten patents

20080224704 - Apparatus and method for detecting and identifying ferrous and non-ferrous metals

June 2008 - Allan Westersten patents

20080150537 - Metal detector with discrimination against metal-mimicking minerals

March 2007 - Allan Westersten patents

20070046288 - Hybrid-technology metal detector
 
[size=large]Patents of Prospector_Al
7,701,337 - Hybrid-technology metal detector
7,701,204 - Metal detector with reliable identification of ferrous and non-ferrous metals in soils with varying mineral content
7,656,153 - Metal detector with improved receiver coil[/size]
 
Hi Dave,
What happened to the "Pulse Devil" that you developed that you said had good iron disc.
Can you please give update on it?
Cheers.
 
mikebg said:
[size=large]Patents of Prospector_Al
7,701,337 - Hybrid-technology metal detector
7,701,204 - Metal detector with reliable identification of ferrous and non-ferrous metals in soils with varying mineral content
7,656,153 - Metal detector with improved receiver coil[/size]


Does this mean a new detector is to come on the market?
 
Top