More on Hunting in Iron

[Anonymous]

The notion that we cannot pick good target from iron is not correct as far as I am concerned. There are some suggestions posted on the forums that will not hold a lot of water in actual hunting or even the most basic test in the field or otherwise. I realize they are baised on incorrect observations or assumptions and having been guilty of that so often and don't want to be critical least I be judged. Here are some ways to pick coins from iron. I suggest to anyone that they try these methods for themselves prior to claiming they do not work or feel they or there idea are being attacked becasue I assure that is not the case.
<span style="background-color:#ffff00;">VLF detectors from the first one invented which includes the pulse induction class of detectors such as the Explorer will detect iron at a greater distance from the edge of the coil than it will a coin.</span> When iron is detected we can center the target and then slowly sweep the coil towards the targets. As an example a piece of iron half the size of a standard horseshoe will be detected a good eight inches from the outer rim of the coil if using the 8

 

[Anonymous]

Cody,
You wrote:
<span style="background-color:#ffff00;">If a coin is co-located with iron less than the width of the coil from the iron then consider the following. When we sweep the coil so that a coin and iron are passed in parallel then we will hear an iron sound. If we sweep the coil so that the coin and iron are passed in series then we will have a low high in one direction and high low in the other direction.</span>
If one has read many of your posts, it is understood that this comment relates to hunting in the Ferrous mode. But, for those less familiary with you preferences, then it may not be clear to them that your example assumes that you are using Ferrous mode. If one were using the Conductive mode, then they would hear two high tones with the iron target probably being somewhat higher in tone than the coin.
Regarding you comment about the iron and coin being in parallel and having the iron tone dominate:
I ran the following air test.
* A 2.5" rusty nail is taped to a plastic ruler with with a clad dime located on the plastic ruler about 2" away from the tip of the nail. The nail is located lenthwise along the ruler with the tip of the nail pointing at the dime.
TEST #1 The targets are moved along the center strip of the 10.5" coil so that both targets are moving along the axis of the center strip at the same time.
* The detector is on a wooden table about 2' from the floor and away from metal objects.
* Sensitivity is set to 20 to reduce external noise inside the house
* Ferrous mode.
* Deep on and Fast off.
* The ruler is oriented with the axis of the ruler parallel to the center strip of the coil and about 6" below the bottom of the center strip of the coil.
* The targets are moved towards and along the center strip approaching the coil from well beyond the front portion of the coil with the nail reaching the front portion of the coil first and then followed by the dime.
* The targets are "wiggled" slightly (perpendicular to the center strip of the coil) as the targets are moved along the center strip of the coil.
RESULTS
* The results are not intended to be conclusive, but rather indicate a general trend.
* The iron nail ID is generated when the nail is still a few inches before even reaching the front edge of the coil. The digital reading is 31,29. The nail is dominating the ferrous reading. Keep in mind that both targets have about the same conductive readings.
* Yhe iron nail ID continues to dominate the sound and the ferrous reading until the dime reaches the point that is actually an inch or so inside the front edge of the coil. At this point the digital reading is jumping around and about 08,28. The nail and coin are both definitely effecting the ferrous reading, but the dime is having more influence than the nail.
* When the dime is about under the middle of the center strip, the digital reading is about 22,29. This indicates that the nsil is again dominating the ferrous reading even though the dime is under the middle of the center strip while the nail is located at the back of the center strip.
* As the dime is moved to the back of the center strip the digital reading goes to 21,29. This indicates about the same results as when the dime is under the middle of the center strip.
AFTER SWITCHING TO THE CONDUCTIVE MODE
I then repeated the test with the detector operating in the Conductive mode. THE RESULTS ARE VERY INTERESTING. The tone ID goes through only very subtle changes (28 to 31) as the targets move along the axis of the center strip. My conclusion is that (at my relatively low experience level of 18 months) I would be much more likely to dig the target using Ferrous mode than Conductive mode.
I would appreaciates you (any anyone else) comments on these results and conclusions.
HH,
Glenn

 

[Anonymous]

Cody,
You wrote:
If a coin is co-located with iron less than the width of the coil from the iron then consider the following. When we sweep the coil so that a coin and iron are passed in parallel then we will hear an iron sound. If we sweep the coil so that the coin and iron are passed in series then we will have a low high in one direction and high low in the other direction.
If one has read many of your posts, it is understood that this comment relates to hunting in the Ferrous mode. But, for those less familiary with you preferences, then it may not be clear to them that your example assumes that you are using Ferrous mode. If one were using the Conductive mode, then they would hear two high tones with the iron target probably being somewhat higher in tone than the coin.
Regarding you comment about the iron and coin being in parallel and having the iron tone dominate:
I ran the following air test.
* A 2.5" rusty nail is taped to a plastic ruler with with a clad dime located on the plastic ruler about 2" away from the tip of the nail. The nail is located lenthwise along the ruler with the tip of the nail pointing at the dime.
TEST #1 The targets are moved along the center strip of the 10.5" coil so that both targets are moving along the axis of the center strip at the same time.
* The detector is on a wooden table about 2' from the floor and away from metal objects.
* Sensitivity is set to 20 to reduce external noise inside the house
* Ferrous mode.
* Deep on and Fast off.
* The ruler is oriented with the axis of the ruler parallel to the center strip of the coil and about 6" below the bottom of the center strip of the coil.
* The targets are moved towards and along the center strip approaching the coil from well beyond the front portion of the coil with the nail reaching the front portion of the coil first and then followed by the dime.
* The targets are "wiggled" slightly (perpendicular to the center strip of the coil) as the targets are moved along the center strip of the coil.
RESULTS
* The results are not intended to be conclusive, but rather indicate a general trend.
* The iron nail ID is generated when the nail is still a few inches before even reaching the front edge of the coil. The digital reading is 31,29. The nail is dominating the ferrous reading. Keep in mind that both targets have about the same conductive readings.
* The iron nail ID continues to dominate the sound and the ferrous reading until the dime reaches the point that is actually an inch or so inside the front edge of the coil. At this point the digital reading is jumping around and about 08,28. The nail and coin are both definitely effecting the ferrous reading, but the dime is having more influence than the nail.
* When the dime is about under the middle of the center strip, the digital reading is about 22,29. This indicates that the nail is again dominating the ferrous reading even though the dime is under the middle of the center strip while the nail is located at the back of the center strip.
* As the dime is moved to the back of the center strip the digital reading goes to 21,29. This indicates about the same results as when the dime is under the middle of the center strip.
AFTER SWITCHING TO THE CONDUCTIVE MODE
I then repeated the test with the detector operating in the Conductive mode. THE RESULTS ARE VERY INTERESTING. The tone ID goes through only very subtle changes (28 to 31 on the conductive scale) as the targets move along the axis of the center strip. My conclusion is that (at my relatively low experience level of 18 months on the Explorer II) I would be much more likely to dig the target using Ferrous mode than Conductive mode.
I would appreaciates your (any anyone else's) comments on these results and conclusions.
HH,
Glenn

 

[Anonymous]

Glenn, great test and very interesting. Yes, I do use Ferrous and will switch to Conductive just to see what happens when testing but am fairly sure I will be hunting in Ferrous. I don't know what to say other than what I have posted but sure look forward to your post and any that can help us dig that silver from the iron.
Glenn, I dash something off hit the spell checker and expect the material to come out "perfect" but after it is posted then see the wrong words, spelling, but really don't worry about it.
Anyhow, I look forward to what other have to say as it would be nice to find ways to get past the iron.
HH, Cody

 

[Anonymous]

That's what I like, science as opposed to conjecture.
In any event, your post showcases the merit of ferrous tones which I latched onto very early with my ExpII. To me, it simply makes more sense for the tones to give me as much info as possible, as I consider the tones the FIRST clue, the one that makes me decide where or not to even read the display.
For a while I was enamoured with the digital display, I tended to like the hard data aspect of it. Alas, we all know that ANY ID is subject to false reads with depth, mineralization, or any number of other factors. Rarely do we get to hunt in clean crisp trash-free frshwater sand, so "gotcha's" are a normal matter of course.
But the cursor display shows TRENDS much better than my mind can graph out the digital readings, so why not let the machine do the work?
Thanks for taking the time, and now of course is the time to ask you to repeat the test with the test setup perpendicular to the center-bar axis. It would be easy enough for anyone to repeat your test thanks to your detailed explanation, but I'd feel like an idiot posting the opposite axis results of what amounts to your IP.
Thanks again, and I hope all is well with you and your's.
DAS

 

[Anonymous]

[No message]