TOTeM confusion

Mike(Mont) · #1 01-02-2017, 06:35 PM

Or is it "Total confusion"?

First off, I have not built the TOTeM project so I don't know for sure.

Okay, I think something is not right and I just wanted to put this out so you can decide if I am right or I am wrong. Sorry didn't post the diagram that shows the null lines for the ferrite rod. It is figure 7 in the "Pistol Detector TOTeM Project". In the diagram the null lines come off the edge of the coil (right at the windings) at 45 degrees. i do not think this is right but I could be wrong. I think the null lines should come off 45 degrees from the CENTER of the TX coil. For a four inch (10cm) diameter coil, that's going to move the ferrite rod back about one inch (about 2.5 cm). Tell me if I am right or wrong.

If I'm right, this is my New Year's present to the forum. Can you hear me now?

Mike(Mont) · #2 01-02-2017, 07:13 PM

"Ah, but then one night in some empty room
Where no curtains ever hung
Like a miracle some golden words
Rolled off of someone's tongue

And after years of being nothing
They're all looking right at you
And then for a while they'll go in style
On 16th Avenue."

Mike(Mont) · #3 01-03-2017, 12:02 AM

I don't know about other Pistol type locators, but if they use a ferrite rod in the null line, then you might want to see what happens.

Just so you know, my contraption works a little like the Pistol type locators. I've been working with it for over a year and that was part of my fine tuning to get the exact line--otherwise my line to the target was not correct. Now I admit I do things differently so I'm not saying I know for sure how it will work on your locator, but I'm sure enough to post this. Like 99% sure. Put it this way, when I used the null line in the diagram, it would not point at the target.

So what i don't know is how it will affect your locator. I realize most Pistol types have the ferrite on the centerline above the coil so it's not going to change the direction angle to the target, but maybe you can tune it sharper and get much better range. I don't know but if it was mine, I would certainly try this. What I have read, these Pistol types get pitiful range, just pitiful. So whatever.

Qiaozhi · #4 01-03-2017, 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Or is it "Total confusion"?

First off, I have not built the TOTeM project so I don't know for sure.

Okay, I think something is not right and I just wanted to put this out so you can decide if I am right or I am wrong. Sorry didn't post the diagram that shows the null lines for the ferrite rod. It is figure 7 in the "Pistol Detector TOTeM Project". In the diagram the null lines come off the edge of the coil (right at the windings) at 45 degrees. i do not think this is right but I could be wrong. I think the null lines should come off 45 degrees from the CENTER of the TX coil. For a four inch (10cm) diameter coil, that's going to move the ferrite rod back about one inch (about 2.5 cm). Tell me if I am right or wrong.

If I'm right, this is my New Year's present to the forum. Can you hear me now?

The diagram in the TOTeM project is correct. The magnetic field is strongest close to the windings, and weaker at the center of the coil, as shown by the Biot-Savart Law.

Mike(Mont) · #5 01-03-2017, 12:40 AM

No problem here, i ain't building one. i admit I am not up on the electronics formulas but the center of the coil definitely has a concentrated field.

Mike(Mont) · #6 01-03-2017, 02:13 AM

One thing for certain is I don't know much about it.

My 99% certainty level has dropped significantly.

Like i said, my contraption is different.

Mike(Mont) · #7 01-03-2017, 04:52 AM

I guess I shouldn't have said anything

Mike(Mont) · #8 01-03-2017, 02:24 PM

I admit there is no question it is not the same for the Pistol type locators. So I'll try not to confuse things any more than they already are. Best to stick with the plans.

Mike(Mont) · #9 01-04-2017, 04:10 PM

I swear i saw another figure but I can't find it. Figure 2 is pretty easy to see the angle. I realize that is not the TOTeM. Anyway, guess I should apologize for the "hoax" comment. I can see you spent a lot of time developing this.

Mike(Mont) · #10 01-04-2017, 07:09 PM

Oops, my confusion runs deep. I now recall the original shown in Figure 2 has the two ferrite rods (coplanar) so I guess I got that one wrong. Well, i hope this is the last post from me on this topic.

Mike(Mont) · #11 01-09-2017, 04:11 AM

i don't wish to dwell on this topic, but it has occurred to me I am using a different "everything" on my contraption. Different frequency, coil, transmitter, receiver, receiver coil, everything. Like the Dylan song "Everything is Broken". So maybe that could explain some of the discrepancy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXgtKUpu4Sw

Mike(Mont) · #12 01-19-2017, 03:55 PM

My curiosity has impelled me to look into this null line a bit more. So I built a different (round) TX coil for my locator to see what i could see. I'm getting the same results as previously reported--45 degrees off the center of the coil. I guess that rules out coil shape as being a factor. Probably should say none of this is "scientific", just my own addled observations. Not trying to nit-pick here, just want to find out why things are not the same, with the hope that maybe i can find some "issue" causing the stifled performance of these pistol type locators.

I know people say to keep conductive objects away from the TX coil as this creates eddy currents that distort the TX coil field. I would suggest this is the area to examine more closely. The original pistol locators had the coil mounted up away from the electronics. I don't know but that's where I would experiment. Well, anyway, just a thought. I don't have one to experiment with. Shouldn't be that difficult to find out, just mount the coil up above the ferrite the same distance as it is below. Much like the original only a bit higher. Yes, it will be more bulky but if i had one I would try it. Like Donald Trump asks "What do you have to lose?" I'd say this much, it can't hurt the performance.

folharin · #13 01-20-2017, 06:09 AM

I have built a field of tests for a year, with no results, most of the area here is moved by agriculture or other means .. what prevents the phenomenon

Mike(Mont) · #14 01-20-2017, 03:35 PM

I don't know where to start. I've never done any work around the 65 kHz. My suggestion is to go to the Accurate Locators website and look at the AGR Receiver. Click on "Additional Information". The developer gives a description of the phenomena as he sees it. Obviously that does not match up with the TOTeM. His theory would require a transmitter frequency of around 3.7 MHz in order for a 65 kHz receiver to detect gold. And according to him, this would be too high to penetrate the ground. But what gets weird with his theory is if there is no transmitter at the needed frequency he suggests using the nearest VLF transmitter frequency for the receiver. That basically throws his theory out the window. But that is something to look into. So to follow that line, just use the TOTeM transmitter like he does with the VLF stations only it would be at 65 kHz.

Mike(Mont) · #15 01-21-2017, 02:41 PM

Don't know much about the 80 Meter radio band, but I did a search on 3.7 MHz and found some weird stuff, among others some acoustical resonance in the atmosphere. So I guess Qiaozhi could elaborate on this one. He didn't explain very well why he chose the 65 kHz frequency for the TOTeM but I suspect this has something to do with it. Again, I've read that 3.7 MHz is too high frequency to penetrate the ground. But just using the passive receiver you might be able to detect surface targets. If you haven't read the info on the AGR Receiver, you should look at it. I think this is the same guy who worked on the Gold Gun.

Qiaozhi · #16 01-21-2017, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

So I guess Qiaozhi could elaborate on this one. He didn't explain very well why he chose the 65 kHz frequency for the TOTeM but I suspect this has something to do with it.

As stated in the TOTeM article:
"It is claimed by certain LRL proponents that a frequency of between 60-70 kHz is ideal for long range gold detection. Consequently we have designed our PD to operate at 65kHz."

Mike(Mont) · #17 01-21-2017, 10:04 PM

Thanks for your replay. I was hoping you would do more than just repeat what you wrote in the book. Well, beggars can't be choosers.

Seeing how we got on the phenomena tangent here, I might add that according to Konstantine Meyl, it is the first 1/6th part of the wave, the near field, where the phenomena occurs. That's not much range on an 80 meter wave.

So you can do some reading on Meyl Scalar if anyone is interested in the longitudinal waves.

abdou2014 · #18 01-21-2017, 10:29 PM

Thank you Mr Mike

Qiaozhi · #19 01-22-2017, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike(Mont)

Thanks for your replay. I was hoping you would do more than just repeat what you wrote in the book. Well, beggars can't be choosers.

You asked for the reason, and that was it. Remember that the TOTeM project was inspired by the Alonso PDK, so there was no plan to deviate from the parameters used by that particular device.