The Proof of Humminbird Down Imaging

General Discussion
Doug Vahrenberg
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:39 am
Location: Higginsville, MO
Contact:

The Proof of Humminbird Down Imaging

Post by Doug Vahrenberg » Wed Feb 03, 2010 12:12 am

This test was performed by Mike Bucca and heres the results:

After all the "hoopla" about Down Imaging and questioning whether Down Imagingg scans directly under the boat I thought of an experiment that would prove without a doubt that the the DI IS TRUE Down Imaging. Let me first go backwards a little bit with some images that have already been posted and then I will move towards my experiment.

Nobody knows 100% for sure what is inside a SI ducer except for those @ Humminbird and anyone who has personally cut one open. Does it strictly have 2 beams? Was Humminbird creative enough to have a 3rd beam inside with the intent of doing down imaging? I don't know the answers to these questions but read further and see if it matters based on the images below.

We started off with this SI image. This is based on the "theory" that Humminbird uses 2 crystals and creates down imaging from these two crystals to get True Down Imaging?

Image

If you look at this photo above you can see that I split the trunk of a good sized tree AND it's limbs all the way to the tips which as you know are much much smaller in diameter. It was also "theorized" that there is a weak signal at the edge of the DI beams. In this photo there seems to be NO weak signal which is proven based on the crispness of this image above. If there was a weak signal it would be blurry on the leading edges and you probably wouldn't be able to pick out the seperate limbs...

An argument was also made that this tree was "massive" So enter exhibit "B". A smaller tree.

Image

Again split right down the middle and it's limbs matched by the adjoining red lines. So if in fact there is a gap or weak signal its surely not shown in these side images as the limbs and trunk is again clearly shown. I got 50 different images of where I have cut tree trunks and limbs in half with Side Imaging so I won't bore you with excessive images..

So even with those two images and many others that were presented by Doug and myself I wanted to take it a step further. So lets take a KNOWN SMALL target and see what we can do with it.

Image

Here is a balloon. It was blown up to roughly about the size of a volleyball. It is approximately 7 inches across. It is anchored by a milk jug full of rocks with twine and a bouy to above it which marks the spot on the surface.

So all I had to do was run over the bouy to try my hand at SPLITTING a Ballon in half. I was careful to take the boat out of gear to prevent it tangling in the prop as I heard the bouy slide under the hull.

Image

The math is 3.5 inches is HALF of 7 inches the width of the ballon. Can I get 3.5 inches of a balloon on either side of the SI beams AND have it show up on SI, DI and 200khz sonar?? Here is the cross segment of that experiment.

Image
The balloon is approximately 15ft from the bottom and it WAS SPLIT in half by the SI beams (3.5 inches on each side) and it did show up on DI and 200khz (20 degree) sonar....

Here is a bigger image of the screen shot.

Image

and just in case you think I got lucky :wink:

Image

I got plenty more images where the balloon has been split and others with 200hz, 83hz, 200/83 sonar split with DI etc etc.. This one below shows that I had the sensitivity on just 12. Just a little over half way which means I still got more JUICE to spice up the image. I bet I could have easily gone to 10 and still see the balloon.

Image

Here is proof in the pudding and what it all boils down to..

Image

Having done the test above proves that there is solid coverage below the boat. Knowing how to get quality images and basic tuning of your machine is part of getting the most out of your unit. If your unit can't do this simple test call Humminbird customer support @ 1-800-633-1468

Enjoy your FREE TRUE down imaging :). I know I am :)
Last edited by Doug Vahrenberg on Wed Feb 03, 2010 9:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
Learn more about Side Imaging: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sideimaging

StrikeBack
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 10:05 pm
Location: Western Australia
Contact:

Post by StrikeBack » Wed Feb 03, 2010 2:25 am

Spot on again Doug. I have many images where I have slit objects and they are shown in both sides of the screen. Also in regard to the 800 khz freq supposedly not going up as far to the surface, I have found that by increasing he sensitivity (brightness of the screen) you do see more closer to the surface. Yes likely the fan of the beam may be less than the 455 but these beams are not discrete, they don't just go to an exact angle. They may be weaker at the edges but this can be mitigated by increasing the sensitivity. At least this is what I have found on the water and not in the lab.

Thanks Doug for your most valuable contributions on this and other site.

Much appreciated from the boys DownUnder
John

StrikeBack Tackle
Humminbird Dealer
www.strikebacktackle.com.au

ITGEEK
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 3:29 pm
Location: Maryland

Post by ITGEEK » Wed Feb 03, 2010 9:02 am

That's a great post Doug.

So, my understanding in laymens terms of what you said is this:

1) The SI transducer probably only has 2 beams/crystals inside of it.
2) One beam shoots to the left and one beam shoots to the right, each starting from the middle of the transducer.
3) If something is directly under the transducer, both beams will at least see a part of the object.
4) The engineers at Humminbird have found a way to combine the two areas originating out from the middle of the transducer and looking downward into one clear image.

OK.
If all of that is true, then here's my question.
It seems to me that there would be a very small area directly, dead center of the transducer straight down that would be blind, unless the right beam can see a little to the left and the left beam can see a little to the right of center. Thoughts?

StrikeBack
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 10:05 pm
Location: Western Australia
Contact:

Post by StrikeBack » Wed Feb 03, 2010 9:06 am

I am sure that this is what Doug is describing and it is also what I have found in practice, ie there is no blind spot under the boat.
John

StrikeBack Tackle
Humminbird Dealer
www.strikebacktackle.com.au

Doug Vahrenberg
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:39 am
Location: Higginsville, MO
Contact:

Post by Doug Vahrenberg » Wed Feb 03, 2010 1:12 pm

First off this test was performed by my good friend Mike Bucca. We discussed how we could prove the theory of full coverage and Down Imaging. He ran these tests yesterday. Mike and I have been taking a pounding from some others lately. We are showing that we feel that SI has full coverage by images we have saved:

Like this one I split these willow trees:

Image

This photo you can see the trees prior to flooding when the water was in the parking lot here:

Image

This Bridge that has exact duplicate scans on both sides of the screen:

Image
Learn more about Side Imaging: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sideimaging

tschultz
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 6:25 pm
Location: S. Minnesota

Post by tschultz » Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:00 pm

One comment that I have is that a balloon at 20 ft or whatever depth it was would be much smaller than 7" across due to water pressure. I'm not sure how much smaller it would be, but I bet it would be significant. So your results are even better than you imagined.

StrikeBack
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 10:05 pm
Location: Western Australia
Contact:

Post by StrikeBack » Wed Feb 03, 2010 7:16 pm

Quite frankly, it does not matter how big an object is. If it shows up on both sides then it the transducer covers the total area. The only thing is that with a larger object, the spoilers may wish to say that part of the object is shown on one side and part the other. When it is a very small object it is harder for them to argue this. I think the experiment has put the issue to bed.
John

StrikeBack Tackle
Humminbird Dealer
www.strikebacktackle.com.au

WhompusFinder
Posts: 571
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:02 pm
Location: Alabama

Post by WhompusFinder » Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:27 pm

I agree. The "blind spot" either exists only in theory or so so very small that it doesn't really matter. Unless your looking for a quarter or one single pebble on the bottom LOL. Case closed. Excellent indisputable evidence for me. Good job
Are you wishin you were fishin? Not me......

kosmo
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:48 pm

down pictures

Post by kosmo » Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:19 pm

ok i went out today to do some testing of my own.i took a 5 gallon bucket and filled it with pea gravel .i then took one of though heart shaped balloons that i bought at the dollar store and tied it about three feet above the bucket.i went out on the lake and put out two markers.each one about six feet apart and took a rope an lowered the bucket .the balloon broke off as soon as in started to go under.o well ill try the balloon another day.i lowered the bucket without the balloon in the medial ,between the 2 markers.i passed over the spot several times from both ways.i had no problem seeing the bucket.the gps cor. are on the pictures.so i encourage anyone in the kentucky lake area to give it a try.its not hard to find.i think only one time that i didnt see it .i was fooling around with buttons and settings an i came in a little off and ran over the marker.heres some picturesImage

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

skigill
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:03 pm
Location: Southern WV

Post by skigill » Sun Feb 07, 2010 7:42 pm

I am froze up here in WV, but I just thought of a good test. Over on the BBC boards they were griping about using a balloon. How about having the anchor with twine to a float on the surface with a couple 5lb bass or fish tied on ? Then no one can complain if fish show up!

StrikeBack
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 10:05 pm
Location: Western Australia
Contact:

Post by StrikeBack » Sun Feb 07, 2010 7:52 pm

I really think the test is done and dusted. There is ample proof there is no gap between the left and right beams under the boat. Now lets learn how to use the DI.
John

StrikeBack Tackle
Humminbird Dealer
www.strikebacktackle.com.au

skigill
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:03 pm
Location: Southern WV

Post by skigill » Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:03 pm

John, I agree. I think I have seen you post on the BBC forums and it has gotten pretty nasty. Nice to read posts with out trash talking.

StrikeBack
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 10:05 pm
Location: Western Australia
Contact:

Post by StrikeBack » Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:16 pm

Yes, I must say that it is really great being part of this one where 99.9 % of the time all is very polite and friendly and most of all informative and genuine problem solving. It is no accident that the Hb guys like Greg, Eddie and Keith have no hesitation in contributing here. I don't think you will see them on BBC threads that get nasty as they have.

There is heaps to learn. I love learning and sharing.
John

StrikeBack Tackle
Humminbird Dealer
www.strikebacktackle.com.au

skigill
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:03 pm
Location: Southern WV

Post by skigill » Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:32 pm

Exactly. I think Doug and TMike have done their best to help everyone too, but there are a couple of people that just want to bash them. I used to have Lowrance sounders, but started out with a 997 then got my 1197. I still have 3 lowrance gps units. Using this forum and the sideimagingsoft forum, you just cannot get better support(Humminbird support rocks also). The help is tremendous.

StrikeBack
Posts: 550
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 10:05 pm
Location: Western Australia
Contact:

Post by StrikeBack » Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:43 pm

Yes indeed. There are a number of really solid guys who deserve medals.

I started off with a black and white Lowrance, then a 3D Humminbird, then back to a colour Lowrance. When HB SI came out, I though maybe this technology will finally make it possible to differentiate between timber and fish and wow it absolutely did and I have not looked back. I am sure Lowrance SI users will catch up pretty quickly in experience but HB SI users have been with SI for quite some time so we have learnt lots about transducer placement, interference, settings and the like and are more than happy to share it as evidenced by this, Doug's and Rob's forums. I am looking forward to my next barra trip at Easter to see what I can get out of DI. We will see.
John

StrikeBack Tackle
Humminbird Dealer
www.strikebacktackle.com.au

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Created by Matti from StylesFactory.pl and Warlords of Draenor
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
 

 

cron