Fiber CPU's - That's how i do them

[JesseSShaw]

This time I kept heat applied just below the boiling point so that I could monitor the reaction. I eventually had to call it a day so I let it cool and corked it so I could continue the process the next day with heat again. I noticed that when the solution cools down, it becomes very dark. After applying heat again, the solution reverts back to a semi-opaque state. I kept adding HCL as needed while keeping heat applied so as not to remove the iron chloride and disturb the reaction. Now I am thrilled to say that the contaminant metals are continuing to dissolve. Maybe another day of applying heat should complete the dissolution. Considering this was my first time attempting this procedure, I made mistakes and used a tremendous amount of HCL. I am not sure how much HCL would actually be consumed for this procedure if done correctly. That will have to wait for the next time I attempt it.

I am not sure if this question was already asked somewhere on this forum. Forgive me if it was answered already. But does anyone know where I can find filters under 1micron pore size? I found some on amazon.com but they are unbelievably expensive. I would like to filter out as much of the gold as I can before storing the solution for later processing.

Thanks for sharing information and the help. It is much appreciated.

 

[Geo]

you dont need to filter. just let everything settle and gently decant. you can use Butchers method of using a suction bulb to draw the solution off. you will need to rinse anyway, so keeping the material in the vessel will keep you from losing any gold during these steps.

 

[JesseSShaw]

Just to be clear, what you are saying is that ALL of the gold will settle to the bottom of the flask? There will not be micro particles suspended in the solution? I want to make absolutely sure of this since I am a greedy bugger and want to salvage all the gold. :lol:

 

[samuel-a]

Just to be clear, what you are saying is that ALL of the gold will settle to the bottom of the flask? There will not be micro particles suspended in the solution? I want to make absolutely sure of this since I am a greedy bugger and want to salvage all the gold. :lol:

Given enough time, it will all settle.
Usually, 24-36 hours is enough.

 

[rewalston]

Even if it all doesn't settle, that's what the stock pot is for

 

[JesseSShaw]

Given enough time, it will all settle.
Usually, 24-36 hours is enough.

Seems to me that surface tension would trap some particles on the surface of the liquid and with micro air bubbles. But you are one of the professionals so I will trust the information provided for me. Thanks for the reply.

Even if it all doesn't settle, that's what the stock pot is for

I understand that. The reason I am looking for high efficiency filters is because I want to extract as much of the gold as I can BEFORE putting the solution on a shelf for later processing. Either way, if I get enough together to melt and sell then I have no choice but to be satisfied.

 

[Geo]

when you filter gold powder, its the tiny particles that get trapped in the filters fibers. the only way to liberate them is to incinerate the filter. i never filter powder of any kind.even filtering foils ties up a small portion of your values as does filtering gold bearing solutions.these are somewhat unavoidable, but filtering powder is.

 

[JesseSShaw]

when you filter gold powder, its the tiny particles that get trapped in the filters fibers. the only way to liberate them is to incinerate the filter. i never filter powder of any kind.even filtering foils ties up a small portion of your values as does filtering gold bearing solutions.these are somewhat unavoidable, but filtering powder is.

Now that makes sense. 100% extraction is impossible (correction, highly unlikely) regardless of the method. Well, if that isn't a big downer.

I suppose my question should be if anyone knows where to find ashless filters under 1 micron pore size (Inexpensive). I don't know if the ones I found on amazon.com are ashless but they sure are expensive. It seems to me that I would only need these type of filters for this method or any method that does not involve the dissolution of precious metals. If they are all expensive then I will just have to settle for losing minute quantities. The desire for precision and perfection is a downfall of mine if you haven't noticed. Depending on the situation, eventually I give up however, I do spend a significant amount of time striving for it in some cases when it seems worth it. :lol:

 

[Harold_V]

when you filter gold powder, its the tiny particles that get trapped in the filters fibers. the only way to liberate them is to incinerate the filter. i never filter powder of any kind.even filtering foils ties up a small portion of your values as does filtering gold bearing solutions.these are somewhat unavoidable, but filtering powder is.

Now that makes sense. 100% extraction is impossible (correction, highly unlikely) regardless of the method. Well, if that isn't a big downer.

I suppose my question should be if anyone knows where to find ashless filters under 1 micron pore size (Inexpensive). I don't know if the ones I found on amazon.com are ashless but they sure are expensive. It seems to me that I would only need these type of filters for this method or any method that does not involve the dissolution of precious metals. If they are all expensive then I will just have to settle for losing minute quantities. The desire for precision and perfection is a downfall of mine if you haven't noticed. Depending on the situation, eventually I give up however, I do spend a significant amount of time striving for it in some cases when it seems worth it. :lol:

You'll come to understand that a filter will trap almost any sized particle as it is used. The surface of the filter gets coated with the solids contained within the solution, so everything filters through the solids. Even very fine particles will be trapped if you recycle the solution once that occurs. The negative side is, as it plugs, it slows down, and if there's tin present, it can come to a virtual stop. The ultra fine filter you seek would most likely yield nothing but problems with filtration, as you'd be working with rather dirty solutions that will be difficult to filter, even under good conditions.

I highly recommend you reserve the use of very tight filters to solutions that bear almost no contamination. That might be gold that is refined a second time. For that operation, I used a Whatman #5 with excellent results. Otherwise you'll spend endless time filtering. As has been suggested, solids will settle readily--even miniscule particles. You'll see an excellent example of that when you precipitate and minute particles of gold are formed. They often take a day to settle, which is very visible. They form a layer and slowly sink to the bottom.

Harold

 

[JesseSShaw]

You'll come to understand that a filter will trap almost any sized particle as it is used. The surface of the filter gets coated with the solids contained within the solution, so everything filters through the solids. Even very fine particles will be trapped if you recycle the solution once that occurs. The negative side is, as it plugs, it slows down, and if there's tin present, it can come to a virtual stop. The ultra fine filter you seek would most likely yield nothing but problems with filtration, as you'd be working with rather dirty solutions that will be difficult to filter, even under good conditions.

I highly recommend you reserve the use of very tight filters to solutions that bear almost no contamination. That might be gold that is refined a second time. For that operation, I used a Whatman #5 with excellent results. Otherwise you'll spend endless time filtering. As has been suggested, solids will settle readily--even miniscule particles. You'll see an excellent example of that when you precipitate and minute particles of gold are formed. They often take a day to settle, which is very visible. They form a layer and slowly sink to the bottom.

Harold

I appreciate all this wonderful information. Look at you guys go, very willing to offer up an extended array of information for an amateur in this field of science. I have seen 0.2micron filters included with vacuum filtration apparatuses. That leads me to believe that with forced filtration, a very fine filter will not hinder filtration time. The Whatman #5 is a 2.5micron filter and coffee filters are anywhere from 5microns to 20microns if the information I gathered is accurate. I have yet to test any filters other than coffee filters so I can not argue any point on this subject with any real accuracy. After extrapolating from my thoughts, it stood to reason that I could use a very small pore size to extract as much of the gold as possible from the solution even with dissolved contaminates. If it would take an unreasonable amount of time by gravity then I would eventually invest in a vacuum filtration unit. I am a man of practical application so I am perfectly willing to test theories so that I may accurately state information based on first hand experience rather than relying on the fallible nature of communicating information. That is not to say I will not listen and no offense was intended in that statement. I have no choice but to listen to the voice of experience in this situation because I have no personal experience to draw from. However, I would still like information about the filters I asked about "if anyone possesses the information" so I at least have a source in which to go for filters no matter which size I am looking for. For this particular process, I am going to limit the washes to decanting. But for the future, I would like to experiment with filtration. This will provide me with the experience and you with the ability to say "I told you so" :lol: which I don't mind considering I learn best by personal experience. So, does anyone have any information on where I could acquire filters of a wide range of filtration? The large pore filters are covered as I have easy access to coffee filters. It is the fine filters I am finding difficult to locate at a reasonable price. Is there such a monster as a filter under 1 micron that isn't unbelievably priced?

Again, thanks for the information. Do not think for a moment that it is not appreciated.

 

[samuel-a]

JesseSShaw

Medium flow filter papers will serve you perfectly. the pore size is usually aound 7 microns.
As far as i know, filter papers graded below one micron are unbelievably expensive beside the fact that they are very slow. As harold mentioned, as soon as filtrate start to pile up, the fine particles will slowly clog the filter anyway.

In my video, i have used medium flow paper. The resulting filtered solution didn't contain any particles what so ever.
Filtering that way, usually require vacuum due to clogging but can be done by gravity if you have the time.

The next step of this process (the way i like to to it and i think it the most efficiant) is to put the entire filter + filtrates in hot AR.
Some may not agree with me, but that's my opinoin and experience.
The point is to accumulate as much gold as possible into one filter. Now, If you have one filter paper which is loaded with gold foils/powder, burning it may cause some losses if not done currectly.
In hot AR however, all of the gold and left over BM are dissolved and the paper breaks down to a pulp which is very easy to filter out and wash.

 

[JesseSShaw]

I finally have been able to acquire some experience with this process. I have theorized a couple possible solutions to the gold that is not recoverable using this method. First, let me explain. I have theorized that using the method outlined here, there will still be gold suspended in the solution by means of surface tension and insufficient filtration. Also when dealing with micro-size environments, fluid mechanics changes. The fluid becomes viscous.

I was determined to get an answer as to where I might be able to acquire filters under one micron in pore size. That proved to be a dead end endeavor. I was able to get my hands on a single filter that is of 3 micron pore size which was given to me by someone who happen to have one laying around. After playing the waiting game of filtering through said filter, a microscope was able to show me that there was still gold in the solution as expected. I would guess about 1 parts per 1000. Also, there were particles trapped in the filter itself as expected.

In summary, this method should only be used for bulk removal of gold. The filter and solution are to be stored for further processing. This was never in question. I did attempt to remove as much of the gold from the solution as possible through experimentation with only HCL as a dissolvant and was seeking information on where I could acquire the materials to perform my experiments. One can only do so much with the materials available. Since I was limited by the availability of materials, I could only make certain determinations and leave the rest up to continued theory. Be aware, many may not see the minuscule amount of unrecoverable gold as worthy of extraction. I made the attempt in the name of science.

 

[nickvc]

Which ever method or process you use to refine gold you will never get 100% of the metal back in that single process. If your really careful and take your time you might recover 99%, that's why we use various methods to recover the small amount that escapes including the stock pot, saving used filters for further processing when we have a decent volume, saving any fluxes used, traps on fume hoods to catch any spills and filters and traps on the extraction to recover any values that escape during dissolution or incineration, I personally always put any solution that had values through a settlement tank or holding tank and leave it to settle and test it for values before passing it on to the tanks to neutralise the acids and remove the other dissolved metals, over a period of time you do get some values back which are always a bonus to me.

 

[JesseSShaw]

Which ever method or process you use to refine gold you will never get 100% of the metal back in that single process. If your really careful and take your time you might recover 99%, that's why we use various methods to recover the small amount that escapes including the stock pot, saving used filters for further processing when we have a decent volume, saving any fluxes used, traps on fume hoods to catch any spills and filters and traps on the extraction to recover any values that escape during dissolution or incineration, I personally always put any solution that had values through a settlement tank or holding tank and leave it to settle and test it for values before passing it on to the tanks to neutralise the acids and remove the other dissolved metals, over a period of time you do get some values back which are always a bonus to me.

If you review my previous posts, you will see that my goal was to recover as much gold as I could during the first process. The fact that 100% recovery is nearly impossible was never in dispute. I inquired as to where I could obtain the materials I needed for experimentation. With my inability to acquire specific information along with the limited supplies and materials I was forced to work with, I came to the only conclusion possible. I appreciate whatever information I can acquire through experience or shared. Experience remains my best teacher in any case. :mrgreen:

 

[nickvc]

My post wasn't aimed directly at you but was more of a general observation to all newbies that might read this thread. It's easy to lose a big percentage doing small amounts, maybe 1/2 gram on a 10 gram job but you might only lose 1/2 - 1 gram on a 100 gram job. The point I'm trying to put over is we keep everything and even more important we test all solutions for values, tiny amounts of the materials we recover and refine can add up over time to a nice amount when we recover and refine them and the more refining you do the bigger the amount to recover and the one point to remember is that when we start we tend to be less skilled and loses are going to be higher generally then than later in our processing career.

 

[Geo]

Which ever method or process you use to refine gold you will never get 100% of the metal back in that single process. If your really careful and take your time you might recover 99%, that's why we use various methods to recover the small amount that escapes including the stock pot, saving used filters for further processing when we have a decent volume, saving any fluxes used, traps on fume hoods to catch any spills and filters and traps on the extraction to recover any values that escape during dissolution or incineration, I personally always put any solution that had values through a settlement tank or holding tank and leave it to settle and test it for values before passing it on to the tanks to neutralise the acids and remove the other dissolved metals, over a period of time you do get some values back which are always a bonus to me.

If you review my previous posts, you will see that my goal was to recover as much gold as I could during the first process. The fact that 100% recovery is nearly impossible was never in dispute. I inquired as to where I could obtain the materials I needed for experimentation. With my inability to acquire specific information along with the limited supplies and materials I was forced to work with, I came to the only conclusion possible. I appreciate whatever information I can acquire through experience or shared. Experience remains my best teacher in any case. :mrgreen:

theres a method of drawing fluid from solids without filtering and does a much better job. the method i am referring to is called wicking. i wont explain what it is, not to be hard to get along with, but you will learn more about it than me typing a pamplet on how it works by searching for it yourself.

 

[Geo]

dont forget the angels part. prospectors i used to hang around with used to say "if you worry about trying to get every speck, you'll go crazy. dont worry about what gets away because its just the angels part"

 

[JesseSShaw]

theres a method of drawing fluid from solids without filtering and does a much better job. the method i am referring to is called wicking. i wont explain what it is, not to be hard to get along with, but you will learn more about it than me typing a pamplet on how it works by searching for it yourself.

Right. Fluid mechanics. Basic physics. Though terms may differ for the sake of comprehension, the physics remain the same. Adhesive forces allow some fluids to "cling" to the surfaces of some solids, giving the ability to "draw" liquids against gravity. I never considered this method of removing solids from solutions. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Now I have something else to consider. (Wish I thought of it first. but one can't think of everything.)

dont forget the angels part. prospectors i used to hang around with used to say "if you worry about trying to get every speck, you'll go crazy. dont worry about what gets away because its just the angels part"

Not every "speck". Just what is possible. :mrgreen:

 

[tuliopercussao]

this is just one of my works!! not mastered the English very much!! just want to contribute to research and science!! I hope you enjoy the information!!

 

[luiggiphilipi]

Sorry for my possibly dumbness, but i'm new to this...

but when you say:

4- Place a cork of fit a condensation setup to keep evaporation to a minimum.

i need to put something to filtrate the gases being exausted right?

like a filter in the up side (in the cover)...

or am i a way too wrong?