Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Something to have a play with!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Something to have a play with!

    Attached schematic of HEAVILY modified TGSL. Not sure if it will work (should) might require a LITTLE work. See what it does anyone?

    Uses Andy Flinds "Flindulator" demodulators (full wave) proceeded by 40HZ filters (to allow closer operation to power lines). An added threshold control AND sensitivity controls. Andy said these demods make the machine MUCH quieter as they pick of BOTH halves of the incoming signal. One are a BIG improvement could be made, is in the zero crossing detectors and the phase shifters. What Tesoro use is bluntly CRAP and amateurish. If ANYONE can get the two phase shifted signals up to a nice clean signal across the WHOLE range then this machine would be even BETTER.

    IF anyone builds this let me know how it performs.

    I WAS going to include Ivconics dual tone mod, but I thought I'd get the basic guts going first!
    Attached Files

  • #2
    Thanks Sean.
    Can you post this with/as JPG so that it can be edited with MS Paint? I like to add notes on my drawing collection such as mods, revisions, authors and Geo Post #.
    Looks good man, it's on the honey list.
    Phil M

    Comment


    • #3
      I'll do this in the next few hours.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by turtlebowl View Post
        Thanks Sean.
        Can you post this with/as JPG so that it can be edited with MS Paint? I like to add notes on my drawing collection such as mods, revisions, authors and Geo Post #.
        Looks good man, it's on the honey list.
        Phil M
        Here is a jpg version.
        Attached Files

        Comment


        • #5
          Thank Tinkerer.

          I've got 8 windows open at the moment. 4 on this forum (pages on PI design) one on magnetic induction theory, one browser game and my Altium CAD AND...email Phew!!!!

          It would have been quite a few hours until I could have put that up.

          Comment


          • #6
            Hey Tink,,,,,how yu do dat?

            Comment


            • #7
              Here is a Much Larger/Clearer Picture of this schematic.
              http://www3.telus.net/chemelec/Temp/DET-0.JPG

              Comment


              • #8
                It is very simple... But be careful.

                Originally posted by turtlebowl View Post
                Hey Tink,,,,,how yu do dat?
                If it is "NOT copyrighted" you can do the following (with reservations):

                Un-Secured Non-Copyrighted PDF copy:
                Merely highlight the image, and copy it. It will be marked that you can extract copies when the .PDF file was created. So therefore this is legal.

                Secured Non-Copyrighted PDF copy:
                If it permits extracting copies, then extract it the same way as above. It will be marked that you can extract copies from the .PDF file when it was created. So therefore this is legal. In this document, everything is permitted. One can even save it to your computer, as SCRAP, and then put a .pdf after the word Scrap, this Scrap.pdf, and you will find it has an amazing amount of pixel dots in it. Some computers will permit you to highlight his pdf, others will not permit you to highlight the image.

                If it does not permit extracting from the secured copy, that right was reserved by the creator of the document, then to do so, would fall into an illegal area. It means that someone, who has actually created the document, wants to keep it private, and has marked it (in the .PDF file) that you cannot extract any copies from the .PDF file, nor can you then edit this .PDF file.

                It may even be marked "Copyrighted", or not marked in that way in the PDF file. The Copyright Law, regards privately created documents (including PDF files), "as works of art", which fall under the Copyright Law, whether marked "Copyrighted" or NOT marked copyrighted. I will explain the law so that is is understood.

                Even if it is NOT marked "Copyrighted", the Copyright Law STILL gives Copyright protection to this document or graphic file!

                William Lahr has created a lot of hand drawn schematics of metal detectors. Keep in mind, that William Lahr retains an unmarked copyright on his schematics. Now if I take on of William Lahr's schematics, and I put it into a PDF file, well I myself have a copyright on that schematic, but ONLY for the PDF file. NOT for the actual hand drawn schematic. That is still retained by William Lahr. My PDF is my work of art. The hand drawn schematic is William Lahr's work of art. By my taking William Lahr's hand drawn schemtic, and putting it into my work of art, I may be entering into an illegal venture. I could be taking chances, if William Lahr later on says. "I do not like what he did, and I am going to hire an Copyright Attorney", then I am in that proverbial creek, trying to paddle upstream, and without any paddle... That is the summation of the problem!

                If I take a photograph of something, even though Walmart processed the film negative, and gave me printed copies of the photograph as well, I am the creator of that photograph, and even if the photograph is not marked copyrighted, under the Copyright Law it is protected as a work of art. So Walmart better not give out, or sell any copies of my photograph, or they will pay the piper in court. I hired Walmart for one purpose, to process the film itself, and to print out so many copies. No more, no less! If Walmart puts that photograph in their store, on display, well they better "have my written permission to do so", or I will own part of Walmart in a Copyright lawsuit...

                Now if I go to a photography studio, he takes photographs of me, I pay him for the service, and I have my photograph. Keep in mind, the Photography Studio OWNS the copyright of my photographs. NOT Me! I own merely the printed image, not the copyright. It is owned by the creater, which was the studio! I cannot make any other copies of my photo, without the permission of the studio. If I do so, the studio will own my house and boat and car. Within limits, the studio can post a copy of my photo, without my permission, but within limitations. They can say they took this photograph of Melbeta, but better not go to much farther than that. Now if they put my photograph into a mass mailing, well that might not be too good of a decision for the studio. They cannot traffic with my image. Unless I am a movie star! Public figures have a harder time defending their image as they are public people, out in the common realm.

                It all boils down to this statement, "The creator of the artwork, OWNS the rights, ALL of the rights", (including posting the image or document in this forum) whether or not he marks the image or document. He still owns all the rights, for a specific time period, under the Copyright Law. So taking a copy of his creation, we "take our chances"! Unless he said on the image or document, it was okay to make a copy, doing so WE take our chances... Be especially careful, if the creator of the document or the image, the creator mentions that he "retains all of the rights", or "retains the rights of posting the doument", he probably intends to punish anyone who posts his material without his express (written) permission. Man oh man, does the courts punish you, if he said that in his creation, and you ended up posting his creation, and you do not have a written piece of permission to do so!

                Keep that in mind. Even though NOT marked "Copyrighted", it still contains an "Un-Marked Copyright" under the Copyright Law, and can be enforced under the law at any time if you fool with it. Now you may not believe me, but all you need to do, is go to the Copyright Office, and read the law regarding Copyrights. Or ask a Copyright Attorney.

                I was amazed to discover this, one can create his own document or artistic file, and later on, come after anyone, for taking or appropriating his personal created "creation"! This also means, that if it does not permit extraction, and you post it somewhere, you can be liable for damages. Posting it without written permission, "is illegal extraction" of his doument! A Copyright Attorney told me of this possibility! Even something that has no restrictions of any kind, can later create legal strife and grief and damages. I would never post anything, unless it says that you can do so. I would prefer to make my own copy, and then post my own copy.

                I know of a guy, who copied some artistic drawing prints of some schematics, made by a company called Elephant Electronics in Arizona. I bought some of those illegal copies myself, and had to destroy them. When Elephant Electronics learned that someone had made copies of his schematics and was selling those illegal copies, he merely contacted an Copyright Attorney in Arizona, produced the original drawings, and took the guy into federal court in Arizona, and taught him an valuable expensive lesson. He had to notify everyone he sold the illegal copies to, and request they immediately destroy the copies, as they were made and sold illegally. So I was an innocent party, who bought the schematics, and had to destroy my copies! I had to do that, or suffer the consequences, so I destroyed my copies, and signed an document to the federal court, stating that I had destroyed my illegal copies of another's works of art!

                The person who was taught a valuable expensive lesson, was Bomarc Services in Casper Wyoming! I bought my schematics from Bomarc Services, who sold them illegally to me. He told me about it himself, so I know the story... Let it be said here, that Bomarc Services said he will never copy anything that another person has created. He will sit down, and using that schematic as an mere example, Bomarc Services will "draw out his own schematic", which will differ slightly, then put his own schmatic into his material for sale. You see, Bomarc Services creates and sells schematics for a living, and he learned a valuable lesson regarding schematics. The Elephant Electronics schematics did not have a "copyright" marked upon them...

                Why do I know this? Well, I used to draw up my own schematics of various electornic equipment, even created service manuals, and I copyrighted those as well. In a few cases, one even involved an Attorney, who tried to make copies of my schematics and sell them, I had to "teach him a legal lesson" regarding the appropriation of "anothers works of art".

                Copyrighted PDF copy:
                Forget it, as it is copyrighted material, and to do so, will cost you lots of money, if the copyright holder discovers one has fooled with the copyrighted PDF, and decides to employ an Copyright Attorney. All he has to do is contact a Copyright Attorney, tell him that the Copyright Attorney can have all the proceeds of chasing the person who fools with the copyrighed PDF file, and the person who fools with it will be out of thousands and thousands of dollars, as the Copyright Attorney will make an very costly example out of the person for very little cost to the Copyright Attorney. Posting any copyrighted PDF or photo, without the "express written consent from the owner of the copyright holder, is a huge "no-no"! It is a right owned solely by the owner of the copyright holder. Any document or image, whether or not it is an printed image on paper, or an electronic image, is protected by law as a "personal created piece of art".

                I have studied Copyright LAW, and anyone can make a copy of any thing that is NOT copyrighted, if it is printed. But if someone later on comes into the picture, and informs you he created that particular work of art, and has decided to teach you a lesson, well you could learn a costly lesson. Remember, anything created was created by someone, and unless that someone has said, "in the document, or on the face of the document or image", that you can copy it or post related to Compass, and give it out, in the course of my dealership.

                In fact, one can make a copy of any non-protected work, then put it into any form, such as a PDF file, HTM file, or graphic file, printed or digital image, and then put his own copyright on it, and it falls into the Copyright Law! It is then protected by the Copyright. Whether it is legal or not legal, it is protected, and it is then decided within a court of law, whether or not that copyright is actually legal and valid. The holder of the "ORIGINAL" works of art, will teach the ursurper the facts of law... Bomarc Services learned that the hard way. Just because you have a copy, and it is not marked copyrighted, is NO DEFENSE under the law. The creator owns all of the rights under the law.

                Now based upon what I have just said, know the facts. This is why Carl is very careful what he permits to be posted in this forum. Carl can end up with liability for something that someone posts in this forum. A company that is no longer in business, and is most likely not going to protest the publication of a schematic, is a chance one can take. But if they are still running a business, well one should obtain written permission. Some companys, still in business, are not concerned regarding older vintage equipment. Others are still concerned. The law says, "Ignorances of the law is no excuse". I learned that myself in Real Estate Law.
                Melbeta
                Last edited by Melbeta; 01-02-2012, 05:22 PM. Reason: spelling error

                Comment


                • #9
                  ROFLMAO technically it IS copyright which belongs to ME but I give ALL CURRENT users of this forum permission to use as they please as long as it is not commercial, unless the machine works well and Silverdog makes a kit of it, then the only royalty I require is TWO FREE kits. I think that is fair don't you?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sean_Goddard View Post
                    Attached schematic of HEAVILY modified TGSL. Not sure if it will work (should) might require a LITTLE work. See what it does anyone?

                    Uses Andy Flinds "Flindulator" demodulators (full wave) proceeded by 40HZ filters (to allow closer operation to power lines). An added threshold control AND sensitivity controls. Andy said these demods make the machine MUCH quieter as they pick of BOTH halves of the incoming signal. One are a BIG improvement could be made, is in the zero crossing detectors and the phase shifters. What Tesoro use is bluntly CRAP and amateurish. If ANYONE can get the two phase shifted signals up to a nice clean signal across the WHOLE range then this machine would be even BETTER.

                    IF anyone builds this let me know how it performs.

                    I WAS going to include Ivconics dual tone mod, but I thought I'd get the basic guts going first!
                    Looks wild with lots of extra op amps. It would be great if you could explain in detail what each of the added parts/sections does.

                    Certainly in principle a full wave SD should be better, as long as the extra parts don't kick in as much more noise.

                    Could you explain more about what you mean by "zero crossing detectors"? TGSL SD does not use zero crossing detection.

                    The output balancing resistors for the NE5534P probably aren't necessary I would think.

                    Look forward to hearing more analysis and results.

                    Cheers,

                    -SB

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Simon you are right, a 47pF cap between pin 1 and 8 would suffice (silly me missed the AC coupling).

                      The amplifiers are a fairly low noise, so the design should be quite quiet.

                      The 40 Hz filters will take a lot of the noise present in other designs out, but may mean a slower sweep speed.

                      The two LM393's are ZCD's they square up the Tx waveform (they also incorporate phase shift). If you 'scope these outputs, you will see at the two LOWEST pot settings the waveforms are fairly sick looking, whilst at the highest they suffer fold-back and you get double peaks which mean all sorts of erm...cr@p on the switching waveform (some of which gets through onto the Rx signal).

                      Inherently Tesoro designs work, that's all, they are NOT state of the art by ANY means (neither is this for that matter) but it IS a lot more refined, especially as you said with the full wave lock ins.

                      I won't promise stupid performance (if any at all) in fact in the one I breadboarded, I put a LOT of stage bypass links in for example to take out the 40Hz filters (which MIGHT not be needed). This is meant to be the BASE of a platform to test different ways of approaching VLF design.

                      You could also repeat the integrators to get even better mineral handling (4 pole filters) if you liked - switchable Have play.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by turtlebowl View Post
                        Hey Tink,,,,,how yu do dat?
                        There are several ways to do it.

                        I did it with: http://www.irfanview.com/ it is a totally free software for manipulating pictures.

                        another good software is: http://www.donationcoder.com/Softwar...tor/index.html it is free too.

                        Tinkerer

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Sean_Goddard View Post

                          The 40 Hz filters will take a lot of the noise present in other designs out, but may mean a slower sweep speed.
                          Which are the 40 Hz filters in your circuit? You said they were before the SD?

                          I know power lines wreak havoc with the TGSL, but I haven't figured out exactly how or where the problem is injected. The RX coil tank is certainly a 2nd order bandpass filter which rejects a lot of the power line noise. The Synchronous Detector should ignore most of the power line noise since it is a very very narrow band filter centered on 14.5 kHz. However, if the power line has harmonics near 14.5 kHz, that could be a big problem.

                          The amplifier section of the TGSL is a 4 pole (I think) band pass filter centered near 9 Hz, so it should reject a lot of power line noise.

                          It would be interesting to analyze exactly how the power lines do their dirty work.


                          The two LM393's are ZCD's they square up the Tx waveform (they also incorporate phase shift). If you 'scope these outputs, you will see at the two LOWEST pot settings the waveforms are fairly sick looking, whilst at the highest they suffer fold-back and you get double peaks which mean all sorts of erm...cr@p on the switching waveform (some of which gets through onto the Rx signal).
                          Ok -- I thought you were saying you had an improved design there; rather you are saying it is an area for further improvement. I agree that those "sync pulses" get dirty -- the surprising thing is -- it doesn't seem to matter much! I designed a "cleanup" circuit, but never demonstrated any better detection with it.

                          The problem is caused because the TGSL oscillator omits the JFET feedback section and is instead "over-driven", causing a small bump on the sine wave. That bump gets differentiated by the sync-pulse circuit into a big hiccup, which can mess up the zero-crossing detection.

                          Inherently Tesoro designs work, that's all, they are NOT state of the art by ANY means
                          No wonder I like them!

                          Anything that can reduce the effect of noise in my workshop would be very welcome. I suspect that most of the problem noise is near 14.5 kHz and hard to get rid of.

                          I'd like to try some of these ideas out. I certainly have some nice power lines handy to test with!

                          Regards,

                          -SB

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sean_Goddard View Post
                            Attached schematic of HEAVILY modified TGSL. Not sure if it will work (should) might require a LITTLE work. See what it does anyone?

                            Uses Andy Flinds "Flindulator" demodulators (full wave) proceeded by 40HZ filters (to allow closer operation to power lines). An added threshold control AND sensitivity controls. Andy said these demods make the machine MUCH quieter as they pick of BOTH halves of the incoming signal. One are a BIG improvement could be made, is in the zero crossing detectors and the phase shifters. What Tesoro use is bluntly CRAP and amateurish. If ANYONE can get the two phase shifted signals up to a nice clean signal across the WHOLE range then this machine would be even BETTER.

                            IF anyone builds this let me know how it performs.

                            I WAS going to include Ivconics dual tone mod, but I thought I'd get the basic guts going first!
                            Can see theres alot of hard work gone into the design, all we need now is one of us to make a pcb layout.
                            Many thanks
                            Regards

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by simonbaker View Post
                              The problem is caused because the TGSL oscillator omits the JFET feedback section and is instead "over-driven", causing a small bump on the sine wave. That bump gets differentiated by the sync-pulse circuit into a big hiccup, which can mess up the zero-crossing detection.
                              Regards,
                              -SB
                              Just to expand on my own comment -- the sync pulse "dirt" is also partly due to the fact that the LF353 phase shifter is "underdamped", and when the inputs are over-driven by a large TX signal (the TGSL has a much larger TX voltage than the original TGS), the output "rings" after clipping the waveform.

                              Just a nerdy detail...

                              -SB

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X