Potassium Ferricyanide Leach

Hi guys,

I'm at the point now where I've successfully recovered around 3 ounces of gold from E-waste over the past year and a half. The vast majority of this has been from ICs and plated fingers.

I am very interested in moving on towards recovery from plated connectors / pins, once again, it will be small scale.

I have ordered some Potassium Ferricyanide as it seems to be reasonably easy to access because of it's use in photography. Sodium Cyanide and Potassium Ferrocyanide are comparatively difficult to get hold of.

I have a few questions to get me onto the right track. My suggested process is as follows:

1. Dissolve some Potassium Hydroxide (Caustic Soda) in water until pH is 11.5
2. Dissolve some Potassium Ferricyanide in the solution. Is 2g/L about the right concentration ?
3. Add a small amount of oxidizer to the solution - Hydrogen Peroxide.
4. Place some gold plated items in the solution.
5. Place the beaker in a safe location in sunlight - Why ? What does the UV do ?
6. Keep agitating the solution regularly until all gold is dissolved.
7. Acidify (with HCl) a single drop of the pregnant solution in my fume hood to test for Au with Stannous Chloride.
8. Remove excess oxygen from the solution - I have a vacuum pump, but have also seen it done with yeast.
9. Add pieces of Aluminium foil to the solution to cement out the gold
10. Test again as per step 7 to confirm all gold has been cemented.
11. Wash all cyanide solution traces out of the resulting powder and add wash water to the main solution.
12. Kill the cyanide in the main solution with household bleach. - How do I know it has all been destroyed?
13. How is the left-over cyanide waste disposed of safely ?

I would very much appreciate any answers to the above questions or pointers if I've skipped any steps.

Thanks!!

Hi Kernels

You must make sure you buy FerrO not FerrI. They are similar however it's much much harder (nigh on unworkable)to use UV to liberate the CN- ions with Ferricyanide.

Jon

anachronism said:

Hi Kernels

You must make sure you buy FerrO not FerrI. They are similar however it's much much harder (nigh on unworkable)to use UV to liberate the CN- ions with Ferricyanide.

Jon

Click to expand...

Bugger, not exactly what I was hoping to hear. I will keep hunting to see if I can source either ferro- or Sodium Cyanide then.

kernels said:

anachronism said:

Hi Kernels

You must make sure you buy FerrO not FerrI. They are similar however it's much much harder (nigh on unworkable)to use UV to liberate the CN- ions with Ferricyanide.

Jon

Click to expand...

Bugger, not exactly what I was hoping to hear. I will keep hunting to see if I can source either ferro- or Sodium Cyanide then.

Click to expand...

Hi!

the reactions between ferri + koh and H2O2= ferro + o2

If you made anhydrous ferro.(white) Disolv in water and macke free KCN and no need UV.

hello,

@kernels:

i would interchange step 1 with 2 and instead 3 you can better use aeration by an aquarium air compressor (same with "real" cyanide leaching).
so you have your oxidiser (there are many papers which discribe the oxidising AND mixing of cyanide leaching sollutions, espeacially in mining leaching operations, by bubbling in of compressed air or O2) and so you have no problems with your step 8.
in step 8 i have used yeast but...yeast ...i think about MnO2 but i don't know, what is the best but you have to destroy and remove H2O2 or O2.
UV light (sunlight) breaks the ferrocyanide and "frees" the CN-molecule so you get your active ingredient: cyanide.

today i make my next little test: 1g of potassiumferrocyanide in 100ml of aqua dest at 80°C, i put in 8 (really only 8) different pices (and types) of newer connector pins in the sollution and placed it under a 2x18W UV flourescent bulb for 1hr.
after that i let it stand (without the lights) for 5 more hours but only a weak bleaching of the platings, no real deplating even at these high concentration.

it was almost my last try with ferrocyanides and i will only make one real last try at the summer outdoors but i do not know why sunlight should work and why (in my case today) artificial and intensive UV light does not work.
the UV lamp i have used today was such a rubbish of a "face tanning shop" for the use at home.

best regards...frank!

frank-20011 said:

in step 8 i have used yeast but...yeast ...i think about MnO2 but i don't know, what is the best but you have to destroy and remove H2O2 or O2.

Click to expand...

I've read that applying vacuum to the solution will also remove the O₂. I have no personal experience.

the UV lamp i have used today was such a rubbish of a "face tanning shop" for the use at home.

Click to expand...

I wonder if that might be the problem. There are different frequencies and strengths of UV light.

Dave

hello,

i haven't a good vacuum pump and i do not know how deep pressure should rise for deaeration!
the same problem with yeast-a really DIYer methode and i don't know if it work's, how long the reaction should take place and so on. i let stand it over night.
cody used this method successfully.

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhuwO8AjM7k, start at 3:00)

@ frugal refiner: as i've wrote: i will repeat the test in spring or better summer but the artificial UV source is much more powerfull than the UV by sunlight, you need a shorter time to get skin demages like burnings than in the sun and it would surprise me if you need the mixture of different wavelenghts like present in the sunlight.

energy is the codewort, energy make your skin get red and energy smashed the molecules BUT: no evidence for these thougst!


best regards, frank!

When it comes to energy in light, the wavelength is the most important factor. Shorter wavelength have higher energy and a photon can drive a chemical reaction. If the wavelength is too long nothing will happen.
Photons doesn't cooperate, they always work one by one.

Göran

Thanks everyone for your contributions, I will run a few experiments with H2O2 and also air bubbler to see if I can first get gold into solution, then experiment to try and get it back out.

I did manage to find a source for ferro, but will still try the ferri just to see for myself that it doesn't work.

At the moment we are in summer here and the UV in New Zealand is very high (burn time for skin is measured in minutes), so I will definitely come back with some results once I have something working.

hello,

"the wavelength is the most important factor"

that's exactly what i try to express: under the arteficial light (that i've used) you need only a few minutes to get a skin burn and so there is more energy in the emmissed wavelenght than in the sunlight.

"At the moment we are in summer here and the UV in New Zealand is very high"

very comfortable situation

i have to wait for that what we call "summer".

best regards!

frank-20011 said:

hello,

"the wavelength is the most important factor"

that's exactly what i try to express: under the arteficial light (that i've used) you need only a few minutes to get a skin burn and so there is more energy in the emmissed wavelenght than in the sunlight.

Click to expand...

What is the wavelength then? Effect have nothing to do with it.

Göran

hello,

sorry, only a misunderstanding, i agree absolutely with you:

"When it comes to energy in light, the wavelength is the most important factor"

and so my conclusion of it was: in sunlight i need 30min to get a skin burn (only a example, in the summer, at the moment i can stay a week in sunlight and nothing happens to my skin), under my UV lamp i need only 15mins and so, i only thought: more energy by my lamp, more and faster reaction takes place.

that's my explenation to ME: my lamp hurt the skin an so it should be enough to break ferri into CN.

enough, best regards, frank!

That is the problem. If it is a lamp used to tan it is long wave UV while for example a lamp used in a water filter to kill bacteria is using short wave UV. Long wave UV doesn't have the killing effect that short wave light have.

If you have a tanning lamp with a high effect it will work faster than a tanning lamp with lower effect or even the sun. But if it lacks the wavelength a higher effect lamp will not work just as a weaker lamp with the same wavelength. Not working but faster doesn't mean it will work.

Sunlight contains both short wave and long wave UV light.

I don't know what wavelength of the UV light is needed to get the effect described above so this discussion could be moot.

Göran

Keep in mind that though UV is "needed" to break the iron bond of ferrocyanide in order to make the CN available to dissolve gold - but - UV is also a destroyer of CN - & if H2O2 is used as an oxidizer the ability of UV to destroy CN is increased

I can only assume the more intense the UV energy (shorter wave length) the more destruction of CN by the UV

In my research on the destruction of CN I found two methods that use UV to speed up the destruction of CN

1) is using H202 in combination with UV - the UV (bulb) wave length being used is 254 nm - which is the same wave length use in tanning bulbs

2) uses ozone in combination with UV - with the same 254 nm wave tanning bulb

Any one of those elements (H2O2/ozone/UV) cause destruction of CN "by them selves" - but the destruction is VERY slow when it is just one of those elements

However - when high energy (short wave) UV is used in combination ether ozone - OR - H2O2 - the speed of CN destruction is increased

It should also be noted that the closer the UV bulb - the more UV energy absorbed by the solution - the further away the UV bulb the less energy absorb by the solution

In other words - it "appears" - that UV used with ferrocyanide can be a double edged sword (needed to break the Fe bond & free the CN --- but also - if over done - result in destruction of the CN you are trying to free)

frank-20011 posted

and placed it under a 2x18W UV flourescent bulb for 1hr.

but only a weak bleaching of the platings, no real deplating even at these high concentration.

i do not know why sunlight should work and why (in my case today) artificial and intensive UV light does not work.
the UV lamp i have used today was such a rubbish of a "face tanning shop" for the use at home.

Click to expand...

Then in another post Frank posted

the artificial UV source is much more powerfull than the UV by sunlight

Click to expand...

So - as much as UV is needed to break the Fe bond & free the CN of the ferrocyanide - it is also possible you are destroying the CN by using a high intensity "tanning" bulb

That would be especially true if you are placing the UV bulb close (&/or "very" close) to the CN leach solution - & even more so true if you are using H2O2 as an oxidizer in the leach solution

So - if you are using H2O2 - change over to using an aquarium air bubbler "with" the bubbler stone - & ether move your "tanning" bulb farther away - or change over to another type UV bulb (like the ones used in aquariums for lizard's) to see if that improves the leaching with ferrocyanide

in other words - you want enough UV to break the Fe bond & free the CN --- but not so much that it destroys the CN as fast as the Fe bond is broke

Kurt

hello

and thankyou...a lot of true objections and inspirations.

at first i am waiting excitedly for the results of kernels tests with a real nice intensive sunlight and later i will repeat a leaching test at the summer...

best regards!

Some Results from my first test this morning . . .

I dissolved 0.5g of Ferricyanide (yes Ferri) in 200mL of water and added a tiny amount of Sodium Hyddroxide to get the pH up towards 11

I then placed a few gold plated SMA connectors in the solution and placed the beaker in direct sunlight. I didn't add the air bubbler, but stirred the solution every 20 minutes or so for a few hours.

Result - SMA connectors were fully deplated in about 2 hours, I then added some connectors (from 80's mainframe board) which look to be thick plating. They have been in for an hour or so when this picture was taken and are starting to lighten up.

First picture shows the solution shortly after placing in the sun


A few of the deplated connectors after a few hours, looking good


The other connector after an hour or so


Next step will be trying to get the gold back out of solution, but the concentration will be so low that it might be difficult to know if it is cementing out or not.

Here is a before-and-after of the SMA connectors

hello,

crazy....crazy, really nice!

with ferrO you need maybe only 10 minutes?

i think you can't get it out by zn or al (steel wool) because it's to less, to less to get it back from the precipitating metal in visible amounts but you can make a detection before and after the out-zincing.

maybe get out these very small amounts of Au by an improvised electrolytic cell? two sheets of stainless?
is it possible?



best regards, frank!

Hi Kernels

Thank you for sharing that. I've learned something there!

Always good to learn.

Jon

Another update, the trial connector was also successfully deplated and the cementing on strips of aluminium foil appears to be working (very slowly). The foil strips definitely show the brown of gold cementing out. I took this picture yesterday evening, I will get another picture tonight when I get home from work.

I am a bit confused about the cementing, if there is still free cyanide, won't the cyanide just re-dissolve any gold that cements out ?