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.
POLEWAGGER said:Some very good reading! Thanks Larry!
I thought these were very important points.
This was true in my case...
"If the ground is very heavily mineralized due to natural mineralization or pollution, a fixed GB machine would probably be of no value. An error of several degrees, as I point out above, will translate into a negative offset totally masking all targets. To make matters worse, most detectors are designed to work in moderately mineralized ground. Where the ground strength is not excessive. High mineralization will overdrive the front-end circuits of most detectors making them useless. Raising the coil above the ground will eliminate front-end saturation. However, as an operator you may never know just how high to raise the coil in order to avoid saturation."
This too...
"There is no question that a fixed detector design would be less sensitive than a design with a manual adjustment. It is interesting to note that normally an air test will not reveal any difference between the two. The reduction in sensitivity will only take place when you use the fixed ground balanced detector in mineralized ground.
The fixed ground adjust phase is generally calibrated using a typical coil. The phase difference between coils of the same size is usually small, 0.1 degrees or less. Coils of different sizes would be more. A well designed series of coils will keep this variation within acceptable limits. Coil inductance, wire size and operating frequency have to be monitored closely to keep this from being a problem. Overall, in a good design the phase difference between coils is not a problem. You would probably experience more sensitivity change due to the coil
Dan-Pa. said:Most preset ground balances are set slightly positive and work to a degree in most areas however simply put a proper manual ground balance setting equates to more depth and a stable unit.
Why do companies sell units with factory set ground balances is probably due to the cost which varies greatly and thus they can sell the unit at lower costs to the consumer and of course more units being sold. All comes down to profits and marketting and certainly not my expertise.
ds6191 said:I hope it's easy to ground balance Tabman. I'm torn between the Golden umax and the Vaquero. And I'm leaning pretty heavy to the Vaquero, right now I have changed my mind a few times already. Dan
Elton said:Think of Gb Control as a radio Sound control knob.. As you lower the coil to ground If sound goes up ..turn it down..If sound gets lower turn it up.. Raise and lower coil turning knob Up/Down till sound stays the same... or as some like just a little raise in sound..For positive Gb....
BarberBill said:I've posted a number of times that if one is going to have only one detector, it should have either true auto ground tracking or manual ground balance. In milder soils where you may do fine without it, manual ground balance is still a plus and is essential in areas where mineralization is a problem. I do well in my soil with several different preset detectors, but my soil is quite mild. Even then, I own several detectors that either have manual GB or true auto tracking.
BB