Only the detector range counts - the myth is still quite good
During virtually every conversation about treasury search, the initial topic is a detector -it is not strange, because squeaking and unusual for a passer -looking object arouses interest. Unless the interlocutor asks us, more or less eloquent, for moving away from his property, This is usually heard: "Lord, This detector is deeply taking?”
It is not surprising at all. The depth of detection is the most vivid form of the quality of the detector for bystanders, and for many beginner detectors coverage, right after the budget, is the main interpretation determining the selection of the first detector. Hundreds of users are fought on internet forums, trying to convince the world, that deeper means better. Or for sure?
In this post I will absolutely skip the issue of selection of the detector for the purpose of searching, Especially since typically "military" equipment on the domestic market does not have many compared to universal and strictly general partner detectors. We will focus on the issue of coverage. A large range on metal objects requires the construction of a detector - without entering technology, we can accept quite in general, that the range currently defines the sensitivity of the detector and the size of the coil. The first basic problems arise here. The detector will be very sensitive to highly unstable and problems with the correct identification of the target will appear. As far as a significant "overclocking" sensitivity in many technically advanced detectors can give excellent results, This is how it involves the very specific work of the detector, at which the user less advanced will simply get lost and will not achieve the intended effects by incorrect identification of this, what the detector says to him. It is also impossible to increase the size of the coil, because even having in mind only detection considerations, not ergonomic, Searching for small objects with a large coil can be very difficult in many environments. So how do you find a golden mean?
Every engineer in the design team dealing with the design of detectors ask himself this question. Unfortunately, the unpredictable nature of searching (The detector working conditions and the nature of found objects are impossible to estimate) does not make the task easier. That's why we have hundreds of models on the market, different from each other definitely. However, looking at the needs of seekers and market trends, It seems, that the "range above all" principle goes a bit to the background. This is a great trend, Because the range does not define the effectiveness of the detector, Despite such appearances. Why?
This is perfectly illustrated by the example of cleaning the area of hazardous materials, where there is a need to cleanse a specific surface of all objects of a specific nature in the shortest possible time. In addition, these searches apply only to objects to a specific depth (For example, up to 30cm) and larger than, Let's put on a human fist. The effectiveness of work in this area will not grow directly in proportion to the detector range. What's more, The detector is too sensitive and too deep can negatively affect the effectiveness of the search. Of course, you need equipment with good detection depth parameters, But we must add the appropriate selectivity of the equipment and ergonomics. Many say, that the seat is 90% success in search. But what is the perfect area for us, If we do not move around it efficiently? The secret to effectiveness is not to find the best sort of the best sort and a super deep detector, but the right use of equipment and possibilities, what specific place does it give us. Then extraordinary effects can be achieved even in seemingly poor terrain.
Returning, however, to the example with terrain cleansing - the key to success and high efficiency is to properly adapt the detector to existing conditions. As long as the change in the size of the coil for most of us in the field will not be possible, It is worth having a detector, which in a given price group may not be the deepest, But his "brain" will be able to help us in search. In a hypothetical situation in the field, where a deep seeker and an effective seeker will meet, The first of them will have a larger pool of finds, However, she will not be able to translate it into the results. Happiness in the search is needed, But if you want to achieve interesting results, It is better to rely on skills and appropriate equipment. Then happiness will be the icing on the cake, not exception to the rule.
Let me, for example, I know perfectly well from the network, Where are the discussions about "cheap detector with a large coil purchased or more expensive detector". This dilemma is most common in the economic segment of detectors, where some seekers recommend very technically limited to searching, But quite deep and very non -emergency monsters with coils more expensive than the detector. He realizes, that the option of a large range and area of conversion is an allocating option. But what to do, when the area is litite and difficult, and no detector configuration options? Or sit down and cry, or bury in the garbage to amen, What is probably not much in common with the effectiveness of generally understood.
He realizes, that this is just a contribution to the topic, However, its practical development will try to show you on YouTube as soon as he gives way to strong frosts, because digging is currently quite difficult. I hope, that this text will bring at least one "range" to the good path of preference for effective detectors, and not just deep.
