I Did Some Testing With A Tiny 14k Gold Necklace

[MarkCZ]

Hemm, doing some more research I found this, could this be why the earring test my brother did turned out the way it did?

HOW DOES A METAL DETECTOR WORK?

To understand how a metal detector works, we first need to understand a bit about magnetism and electricity. If we pass an electrical current through a wire, a magnetic field is formed around the wire. Conversely, if a magnet is passed over a piece of wire, it induces an electrical current into the wire. This is called an eddy current. In a straight piece of wire, the induced magnetic field is very short-lived as the eddy current has nowhere to go, dies out quickly, and consequently the magnetic field created is quite weak. If the same eddy current is magnetically induced into a piece of wire with both ends electrically joined (like a ring), these eddy currents effectively run round and round, creating a stronger, more concentrated magnetic field which lasts longer.

The transmitter current of a metal detector is applied to the coil (of wire) and creates a large, concentrated magnetic field around the coil. This magnetic field will induce eddy currents into any metal targets in the ground and they will in turn create their own magnetic field. This magnetic field around the target then induces a current back into the detector coil. This is processed in the receiver and results in a sound from the detector. (Or in the case of a detector with a threshold, a change in that threshold.)

Consequently, one of the

 

[MarkCZ]

Who is "Uncle_Willy" here on the forum?

Seems he put up a post back in March 2008 here about gold chains and separate links not the whole chain, seems the thread died at his last post?

Seems E-Trac owners have beat this conversation to death!

http://www.findmall.com/read.php?17,681383,page=2

 

[WV62]

Mark's older brother here Ron,
I was kind of interested in the detector seeing the whole chain or just a link. So I took the original large chain I used for my testing and run it past the Tejon coil and adjusted the disk right at the edge disc. Then I added another chain about half the size of the original in with the larger chain and passed that in front of the coil.

Now in my thinking if the detector is seeing the whole chain and I just added half again more chain then I should be able to run the disc up a little more, and if I the detector is reading only a link then the edge of detection will stay the same.

The edge of detection did not change, as far as the the detector was concerned I never even add the extra chain. So from what I can see and test, little brother Mark was right on with his statement.

I included a picture with the original chain I used for testing on the right and the added chain on the left, there is also a dime in the picture to help give you some idea as to the size of the chains used.

Older brother Ron in WV

 

[D&P-OR]

Uncle Willy (Bill Revis) was an old timer in m.d.ing & the moderator of the Garrett Forum here on Findmall.----He passed away some time back & (of course) a new moderator was appointed (John Edmonton).

Who is "Uncle_Willy" here on the forum?

Seems he put up a post back in March 2008 here about gold chains and separate links not the whole chain, seems the thread died at his last post?

Seems E-Trac owners have beat this conversation to death!

http://www.findmall.com/read.php?17,681383,page=2

 

[MarkCZ]

Okay, I have another question among these post.
I keep reading about how great the Compadre is at finding small gold,
One of its claim to fame seems to be the ED-180 circuitry.
Now, if I'm correct the Compadre also has a gain 10,0000X
And it operates at 12 kHz

So, then I'm researching the Tejon and it looks to also have,
ED-180
A gain of 1,000,000X (according to the Tesoro Tour video)
And operates at 17.2 to 17.6 kHz

So, do I still need to trash my Tejon and buy a Compadre,
Or will the Tejon do just as good on small gold?

Mark

 

[MarkCZ]

Uncle Willy (Bill Revis) was an old timer in m.d.ing & the moderator of the Garrett Forum here on Findmall.----He passed away some time back & (of course) a new moderator was appointed (John Edmonton).

Who is "Uncle_Willy" here on the forum?

Seems he put up a post back in March 2008 here about gold chains and separate links not the whole chain, seems the thread died at his last post?

Seems E-Trac owners have beat this conversation to death!

http://www.findmall.com/read.php?17,681383,page=2

Thanks, D&P-OR, I noticed he had a LOT of post on here. I'm sure a lot of folks missed him after he passed away.

Mark

 

[D&P-OR]

Hi Mark-----Yeah, Bill had thousands of posts here on Findmall.----He lived out in the Portland, OR area & they still have a picture of him on the top of the Garrett Users Forum.---As you say, a LOT of folks missed him (and still miss him) after he passed away.----------Del

Uncle Willy (Bill Revis) was an old timer in m.d.ing & the moderator of the Garrett Forum here on Findmall.----He passed away some time back & (of course) a new moderator was appointed (John Edmonton).

Who is "Uncle_Willy" here on the forum?

Seems he put up a post back in March 2008 here about gold chains and separate links not the whole chain, seems the thread died at his last post?

Seems E-Trac owners have beat this conversation to death!

http://www.findmall.com/read.php?17,681383,page=2

Thanks, D&P-OR, I noticed he had a LOT of post on here. I'm sure a lot of folks missed him after he passed away.

Mark

 

[ringading]

Tabman I think what monte was saying was you need a reference point to no were to start.When I am looking for gold chains,I all ways use a bobby pin as my reference.on my stingray I can set the dis to barely click on the bobby pin an still get the smallest chain.but if I use my Tiger shark the bobby-pin will be just about be gone at min dis.I can find most chains at this setting ,but to find the smaller chains I have switch over to all metal.The strange thing is that the sting ray runs at 10 hz and the tiger at 12.5 hz????

Thanks for your reply Monte. You're very good at explaining stuff.

I encourage people to do their own testing, because I learn so much by doing my own testing, especially target masking.

What I have learned from this last test is a lot.

1) The Cortes and the Golden

 

[tabman]

Thanks, ringading. I know what Monte is saying, but I didn't have a ole rusty iron nail to set the discrimination all the same. Regardless, even if I did, some of detectors in the test wouldn't go low enough on the discrimination scale to detect the gold necklace. Normally when I'm doing depth test on coins, I'll set all the detectors in the test to crackle and pop on a Gator Aid sports drink foil cap. At that setting, I can still detect tiny gold rings, but not tiny gold necklaces.

tabman

 

[Hank68]

My tiger shark gives a sqock type sound on chains, It has a rich audio sound on it, gotta love my tiger,hank

 

[Furious T]

Tabman,
Thank you for the time and trouble you took to do your tests, and your report(s) are quite informative. I thank Monte as well, because he has the knowledge and ability to put what he or any of us do in a perspective that is not within the boundaries of most of us. I think that between your posts, Tabman, and your posts Monte, we can all have a better perspective relating to the finding of chains, and the relative abilities of different detectors. I dont have the knowledge of the working of detectors to be able to analyse as Monte does, but I dont think I have read anything he has posted which conflicts with my knowledge from my own experience with detectors in the field. I thank you both for your time and effort to give us all, newbies and oldies, some fresh insight.

 

[Ken/CO]

MarkCZ,
There are a lot of "experts", but the fact remains that any detector sees whatever is in the ground, whether it is a single link by itself or a complete chain of links, that's what it will report.
That isn't logical that a detector can see only a single link without seeing the whole chain. Also, that chain in the photo doesn't have individual links, it looks to me as one continious chain.
HH
Ken

 

[tabman]

I did a little more testing. I laid the gold necklace out where it was expanded to its entire length. The Compadre wouldn't detect the middle part of the necklace, but would detect both ends. It detected them even better when I laid the clasp and hook side by side so the coil could go over both ends at the same time.

tabman

 

[Furious T]

And the type of chain, i.e. the style of the links can make a difference. I have only found two belcher style chains, both sterling silver. One was found by my Golden UMax, and this chain had a good sized heart-shaped clasp....I suspect the detector picked up on the clasp....the other belcher chain was found on the beach using a PI machine...salt beach, very wet sand. This is a small bracelet belcher chain, and did not actually give a signal, but the threshold on the machine nulled out...I thought it may have been a deep target, so I scraped about an inch of sand away, hoping to get a better signal. The chain was in the sand that I scraped off the top. I have found many chains, all silver, where the links sit well together, but the signal given is not the same as it would be if that amount of silver were in a single item. I suspect that if the links have good contact with each other, for whatever reasons (e.g. chain tangled and rolled into a ball) the detector will pick up the overall mass of metal. If the chain is stretched out, the detector will have more difficulty in "seeing" the whole target, and the signal will vary, depending on which direction you are sweeping at the time. I believe that the size and shape of the links in the chain affects the signal which is received by the detector. If the chain has a large clasp or token attached to the chain, the job of the detector is made easier, but the detector operator may still get a "confused" signal. If the operator is using discrimination, then this will affect the signal as well. Hunting in true all metal mode is probably the surest way of finding chains....Pete

 

[MarkCZ]

MarkCZ,
There are a lot of "experts", but the fact remains that any detector sees whatever is in the ground, whether it is a single link by itself or a complete chain of links, that's what it will report.
That isn't logical that a detector can see only a single link without seeing the whole chain. Also, that chain in the photo doesn't have individual links, it looks to me as one continious chain.
HH
Ken

In the ground or in the air,
If it can't hit on it in the air, (gold or silver, doesn't halo) it isn't going to hit on it in the ground.
So, here is the deal,
If the total gold is one gram (on a scale) one gram of total chain (made up of tiny links) and one gram gold ring, air testing it, it should fall in near the same on the discrimination point!
It won't be, not even CLOSE!

What's being shown here is that chains are coming in around bobby pins, while the same mass in a ring may go as high as a Zinc penny.
If that's the case, which its looking like it is, then the detector must be seeing only a small fraction of the total of a chain.

So, working off "Tabman" testing.
The smallest of chains may lay in a way to increase the disc level, but its still not seeing the whole chain. This means that the detector is only seeing part of it and thus its possible that the total report back to the detector may be a single link, or if the latches are bigger maybe those. So this looks to shake out like this.

For a detector to hit good on gold chains (the tiny ones) it would need to be sensitive enough to be able to detect either a single link, or at lest as small as the clasp by itself and if there is any more of the gold to add to the total then it will come in at a higher discrimination level.

Rings normally don't cause a broken signal, but chains many times do (as being reporting here) if they are getting detected at all and mass for mass silver always comes in higher than gold, hence the number of silver chains over gold that some are finding.

From the research I've done, the reasons for chains much lower response is because the links are hooked together, but each are separate, now if all the links were soldered together then it would act more as ONE mass.

I don't believe I'm saying anything any different that what this thread is all about, "Problems Finding Small Gold Chains" I'm just trying help with understanding why.
The chains links are seen more as separated than joined and so the total mass reported back from the detector is VERY low and so that lowers the discrimination level a LOT! and to a great number of detectors they are below the sensitivity range even in ALL METAL! (they just can't detect something that small)


Mark

 

[MarkCZ]

This persons gold finds for this year,
A little farther down he pictures the chains he's found in the last year or SO! (notice the silver to gold ration)

The link is to another group here at Findsmall.

http://www.findmall.com/read.php?37,1964324

Mark

 

[Ken/CO]

Mark,
Your comment, "From the research I've done, the reasons for chains much lower response is because the links are hooked together, but each are separate, now if all the links were soldered together then it would act more as ONE mass".

Soldering the links together doesn't make it more conductive. That's not how a detector works, it detects what signal from the coil picks up. Think of the detector as a radar, it sends out a signal and if something interupts that signal it, it reflects back to the coil the conductivity and mass of the target. Of course, a detector can see a single link if by itself, but in the same immediate area as in a chain, it sees it as one mass. If you placed all the links in the ground CLOSE but not touching, you would get the same effect as if they were connected.
Ken

 

[MarkCZ]

Mark,
Your comment, "From the research I've done, the reasons for chains much lower response is because the links are hooked together, but each are separate, now if all the links were soldered together then it would act more as ONE mass".

Soldering the links together doesn't make it more conductive. That's not how a detector works, it detects what signal from the coil picks up. Think of the detector as a radar, it sends out a signal and if something interupts that signal it, it reflects back to the coil the conductivity and mass of the target. Of course, a detector can see a single link if by itself, but in the same immediate area as in a chain, it sees it as one mass. If you placed all the links in the ground CLOSE but not touching, you would get the same effect as if they were connected.
Ken

I understand what your saying and in some theory it would seem that way. (For me as well)

But, its pretty much proven in this topic and thousands like it all over the net that,
Total mass weight in gold being equal in a chain and in a ring the target ID range between the two can be on the opposite ends, the chain will be foil to small iron while the ring will be towards the screw cap or zinc penny range.

So, total mass isn't working! I thought it would too, but that don't make it so.

They are thousands of post on the net where people with E-trac's simply can't get the detector to hit on small gold chains, while at the same time they are able to find pretty darn small rings.

My mine tells me one thing!
But reality is telling me differently!

My co-worker (friend) bought an E-trac, then he started hanging out on a couple of the E-trac forums and when he found out that the E-trac's wouldn't hit on small gold chains, even clumped up! he sold it and got a V3I, then as reports came in they wasn't any better at hitting on small gold chains he sold it! Keep in mind that both of these machines are fine at hitting even small rings.

No matter how you toss this, a detector doesn't see the total mass of a chain like it does a single larger loop of the same weight (a ring)!
And me thinking it does, still don't make it so.

Maybe Myth Busters should be called in on this!
But many of the experts on the subject have somehow came to the conclusion that if the detector isn't able to total up the mass of a chain and report that total back as the same total for a gold ring then its not reporting (seeing) the chain as a whole, but rather in portion. I didn't come to that conclusion on my on, but rather people of more brain power that I have.

What I do know, is that by the countless post reporting problems finding small gold chains with detectors that cost in access of a thousand dollars, detectors are not reading gold chains at a match of gold weight for jewelry made up of one single piece!

One reply to a problem poster on the subject was that the chain is sort of like a couple hundred BB's laying down in a hole, it doesn't see them as a total, but if you where to solder then together in any single odd shape, then it becomes one target.
Now, the only other way to really prove this would be to dump three or four pounds of tiny gold chains in a shallow hole and see if it reads like a four pound block of gold (really high on the discrimination level) or would they act like a crappy foil signal?
I would put my money on the crappy foil signal.

Mark

 

[WV62]

Mark,
Your comment, "From the research I've done, the reasons for chains much lower response is because the links are hooked together, but each are separate, now if all the links were soldered together then it would act more as ONE mass".

Soldering the links together doesn't make it more conductive. That's not how a detector works, it detects what signal from the coil picks up. Think of the detector as a radar, it sends out a signal and if something interupts that signal it, it reflects back to the coil the conductivity and mass of the target. Of course, a detector can see a single link if by itself, but in the same immediate area as in a chain, it sees it as one mass. If you placed all the links in the ground CLOSE but not touching, you would get the same effect as if they were connected.
Ken

Ken,

Mark's brother here again

In the pictures attached are 2 of the items that I have been using for testing, I put them on my reloader scale and the gold chain came in at 110.29grs, and the gold ring came in at 100.22grs. Now I haven't done this yet but if I was to pass them if front of my tejon and the little 5.75" coil, which would disc out higher the ring or the chain?

Short of taking them outside and burying them in the yard (I don't think my wife would go for that) could I do to prove or disprove your point? I am open to try if I can set something up.

Ron in WV

 

[MarkCZ]

Mark's brother here again

In the pictures attached are 2 of the items that I have been using for testing, I put them on my reloader scale and the gold chain came in at 110.29grs, and the gold ring came in at 100.22grs. Now I haven't done this yet but if I was to pass them if front of my tejon and the little 5.75" coil, which would disc out higher the ring or the chain?

Short of taking them outside and burying them in the yard (I don't think my wife would go for that) could I do to prove or disprove your point? I am open to try if I can set something up.

Ron in WV

Again, I'd put my money on the ring somewhere above nickels and the chain at foil or below. But, as sensitive as the Tejon is to tiny stuff, I'm going to say that it will detect chain. Now if the ring was to move up to the same weight as the chain I would say it would go more towards the screw cap range.

Mark