|
DanfromNY 12:08:33 Sun Nov 13 2011 |
|
|
MarshallAk 18:04:57 Sun Nov 13 2011 |
One of the testing methods proposed: set the transducer in a bucket of water, with the bucket setting solidly, directly, on top of the overburden. What would you see??? My guess is that most models are going to be utterly useless for that use, while other models might show some promise. I'd be interested in the exact models you were looking at. I have a fish finder setting in the garage, but haven't tested it out yet to see if is any good towards these goals. I bet that sooner or later some big company like White's, Tesoro, Garrett, etc is going to develop a gadget specifically for doing what you describe. I, for one, would love to know how much overburden I have laying on the bedrock! Marshall |
|
DanfromNY 22:13:43 Sun Nov 13 2011 |
|
|
Muley 23:02:21 Sun Nov 13 2011 |
You were supposed to keep that a secret (Dredgers edge), I still have my old X-15 in the garage, used to rig it up on a rubber raft and check the river bottoms here in California 20 - 30 years ago prior to setting up the dredge. Not sure if you can still get paper rolls for the old X-15, probaly not. The X-15 would look down through the layers for several feet and one could tell where the deeper hole's were and tell the difference between already dredged or virgin ground and rock size's. Several years ago I mentioned this on a internet forum and felt like everyone thought that I was crazy, so I've been careful about talking about it since. Here is a link to a simuliar subject line. http://bb.bbboy.net/alaskagoldforum-viewthread?forum=2&thread=327&postnum=6&highlight=fish finder |
|
micropedes1 22:56:20 Mon Nov 14 2011 |
It is a good tool to let you know about bottom contours without digging. Or how much sand is there on top of the gravel bar. |
|
DanfromNY 01:19:50 Tue Nov 15 2011 |
|
|
cobill 16:58:11 Wed Nov 23 2011 |
There has got to be something available that can show us the depth to bedrock, layers, etc.Bill |
|
DanfromNY 13:00:36 Tue Nov 29 2011 |
|
|
ME 15:13:39 Tue Nov 29 2011 |
|
|
DanfromNY 11:57:31 Fri Dec 9 2011 |
|
|
baub 19:16:42 Fri Dec 9 2011 |
b |
|
Brian_Berkhahn 06:14:58 Sat Dec 17 2011 |
|
|
DanfromNY 17:05:03 Sat Dec 17 2011 |
|
|
Muley 00:32:38 Sun Dec 18 2011 |
|
|
Brian_Berkhahn 02:55:19 Sun Dec 18 2011 |
Thanks |
|
DanfromNY 19:22:03 Sun Jan 8 2012 |
|
|
DanfromNY 16:06:43 Fri Jan 27 2012 |
|
|
Thunnus 01:11:21 Tue Feb 7 2012 |
For what it's worth...echo's will show up when you're over hard bottom because the sonar signal being sent to the bottom is bouncing up and down off that hard bottom, returning to the transducer and being sent back down to the bottom again. This shows up as an echo on your graph. For example, you know you're over 10' of water and you see the bottom contour show up on your fish finder at the 10' graph mark. If the bottom is hard, you'll see another identical bottom contour show on the fish finder at the 15' graph mark. It will be lighter than the first bottom contour but identical. If the bottom is really hard you might see a third echo below the 15' graph mark. Soft bottoms won't have the echo, only the contour line showing at 10' graph mark of your fish finder. I would think you'd be looking for those echo's. |
|
DanfromNY 09:21:55 Tue Feb 7 2012 |
|
|
dredger 12:01:17 Tue Feb 7 2012 |
I have been following your thread and admiring your willingness to share, thanks very much, but could not see how to apply those methods to dry river beds, ![]() So I just left it, until the last posts and thought how advantageous to incorporate in my type of dredging, Then bingo, ![]() Using the excavator I can flood the large areas, So, my Question is to all, " how deep is the minimum the best fish finder requires to get working efficiently, ??. 2", 6" , 2'. not forgetting the gravels could be 20' deep, And could i get the clarity or definition you describe between those layers at 20'??, dredger, |
|
Thunnus 20:45:17 Tue Feb 7 2012 |
http://www.bbcboards.net/zerothread?id=600824 |