# Gold,Gold,and More Gold!!!!



## modtheworld44

Hi Yall

I got these out of my newest load.The load came from Delaware,OH.I ran a preliminary test on one of the bigger ones and the test indicates that there should be some where around 0.5-1gram per piece.Just wanted to see if any one else has ever run these before.Thanks in advance.



modtheworld44


----------



## Anonymous

If you take off the white ceramic you'll probably find even more because the gold will be both under the white ceramic and on the base beneath it.


----------



## modtheworld44

spaceships said:


> If you take off the white ceramic you'll probably find even more because the gold will be both under the white ceramic and on the base beneath it.



Hey spaceships

I know your right on that point.The problem is that the ceramic is bonded straight to the box.I have a way to get to it that's way faster than what the 1 pound is taking in poormans AR.I just want to see what the yield for the 1 pound is first,before I change up on my processes.If I get anything close to what I'm thinking,it will be time to speed things up.I agree with that post you made the other day on the "best of ebay" thread.This is the load that will allow me to make $3000.00 dollars profit.Thanks for your honest input,it means allot coming from you.



modtheworld44


----------



## kurtak

Nice score Jerry 8) 8) 

And based on our talk on the phone the other day there are a lot more goodies in the load & you paid a MUCH better price on this haul then on your last haul - you should make a "real good" profit on this one my friend :mrgreen: 

Kurt


----------



## Anonymous

I have similar material Jerry- what did you use to take the gold off?


----------



## kurtak

spaceships said:


> If you take off the white ceramic you'll probably find even more because the gold will be both under the white ceramic and on the base beneath it.



So your saying there's not just Gold,Gold,and More Gold - but even MORE Gold 8) :lol: 

I want some microwave Telecom gear to :mrgreen: 

Kurt


----------



## modtheworld44

kurtak said:


> Nice score Jerry 8) 8)
> 
> And based on our talk on the phone the other day there are a lot more goodies in the load & you paid a MUCH better price on this haul then on your last haul - you should make a "real good" profit on this one my friend :mrgreen:
> 
> Kurt




kurtak

You should see what I got paid for 3/4 of the scrap metal out of this load alone.I'm going to post some more pics later today of the other stuff.That was the funnest 2 trips I've taken so far,and plan to make many more.Your ss pieces looked really good to,I want some LOL :mrgreen: .



modtheworld44


----------



## modtheworld44

spaceships said:


> I have similar material Jerry- what did you use to take the gold off?



spaceships

For the first test piece I used boiling Ferric Chloride,which was pretty fast.Then on the 1 pound yield test I'm running it through Poorman's AR,which is slow.The next batch will go into a much faster process,which I hinted at in one of my other threads.Here's something to think about,we know that gold will not stay in a over saturated iron solution when leeching gold ores.So how can we apply that to what we do with E-waste.We also should Know,if we have actually done the research,that rust will also cement values.I have figured out allot of things for myself that others fail to see the potential for,but like I always say "You can learn allot from a Dummy.Thanks in advance for your interest in my thread.



modtheworld44


----------



## kurtak

modtheworld44 said:


> Your ss pieces looked really good to,I want some LOL :mrgreen: .
> 
> modtheworld44



I stripped the gold off about 8 lbs (not foils - gold goes right into solution - leaves SS as is) only took about 800ml chem & 3 hours --- that was after melting some other gold & filtering some other solutions - so a good day

Sorry I can't tell you the process but the guy that gave it to me told me to keep it between him & I so that's the way it will stay

Kurt

Edit; - to change 600 ml chem to 800 ml chem


----------



## modtheworld44

kurtak said:


> modtheworld44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Your ss pieces looked really good to,I want some LOL :mrgreen: .
> 
> modtheworld44
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I stripped the gold off about 8 lbs (not foils - gold goes right into solution - leaves SS as is) only took about 600ml chem & 3 hours --- that was after melting some other gold & filtering some other solutions - so a good day
> 
> Sorry I can't tell you the process but the guy that gave it to me told me to keep it between him & I so that's the way it will stay
> 
> Kurt
Click to expand...


kurtak

That is a very good process for ss,but how does it stand up against all the other base metals we encounter? My best time so far is 6lbs of fully mixed pins in 8 hours with nothing but gold foils left.HEHE you have his way and I have mine,and each to his own LOL :mrgreen: .Who knows we might actually be able to make some money one of these days,doing what we do and how we do it :mrgreen: 



modtheworld44


----------



## Lou

The way Kurt is doing it would not work for copper based substrates without putting in certain agents that protect the copper from attack.

Even then, so Kurt understands, if you are not exceedingly careful with the reverse-AR, it can go to hell on you in a bad way.


----------



## modtheworld44

Lou said:


> The way Kurt is doing it would not work for copper based substrates without putting in certain agents that protect the copper from attack.
> 
> Even then, so Kurt understands, if you are not exceedingly careful with the reverse-AR, it can go to hell on you in a bad way.



Lou

Are you referring to the boil over you get,when you add too much HCL back to it at a time?Thanks for the lead on the polypropylene filter cloth I bought two of the types they had and it was cheap and works great.


Update:

The first pound,which includes the white ceramic substrate weight,yielded 3grams.The pound consists of 5 boxes,so far that averages out to 0.6grams per box.The boxes did not dissolve as you can see in the picture and because of this the acids were unable to penetrate the bonds holding the ceramic substrates in place.This means that once I finally get the gold from under the ceramic and weigh the trash and ceramics I can get my true average per piece.This is a good start though in my opinion.I'm going to run a separate 1pound test on the smaller boxes to see how much better they yield since it takes 7 of them to make a pound. I think the smaller boxes will produce way more gold per pound,theres more surface area and more visible gold in them than the larger boxes.I had almost 15pounds of these boxes when I started,so that should put me in the 45+grams minimum range just for the boxes alone.Heres a picture of my receipt for 3/4 of the scrap metal that came with this load,the rest is still waiting to be dismantled.Thanks for all the Knowledge yall share with us on a daily basis.Maybe one of these days I'll actually learn how to make some money from refining,who knows only time will tell.


P.S My boxes didn't dissolve,Oh what will I do?
P.S.S Sorry just thinking out loud,I'll figure it out like I have always done. :mrgreen: 



modtheworld44


----------



## kurtak

Lou said:


> The way Kurt is doing it would not work for copper based substrates without putting in certain agents that protect the copper from attack.
> 
> Even then, so Kurt understands, if you are not exceedingly careful with the reverse-AR, it can go to hell on you in a bad way.



Correct - it is reverse AR --- the process was given to me through PMs by another one of our most respected long time members & I was asked to keep it under my hat & because of my respect for this member I was not going to break the confidence he asked me to keep

However - now that Lou let the cat out of the bag - and - because I also received a PM with this link Anyone came up with a technique or process for watch bands ? --- its not really a secret - its just not a well known &/or discussed process

It is just what it says - AR in reverse & it works very well on SS gold plate &/or gold filled - however - there are a few down sides to it

As Lou said "if you are not exceedingly careful with the reverse-AR, it can go to hell on you in a bad way" (ask me how I know :lol:  :lol: )

First you don't want to start with to much HCl & then be "very" careful with following additions - if you start with to much HCl &/or over do additions it will attack the SS & you just started a mess - if you "exceed" the HCl "limit" you have a mess --- also - NO heat - warm is ok (which is why I was working out in the sun) but no real heat

Nitric does not react with SS (which is why it comes in SS drums) but HCl does - so you need to control the HCl in a manner that the nitric keeps the SS passive allowing only the gold to be dissolved - to much starting HCl &/or additions & or heat will cause the HCl to go to work on the SS & then you have started the gold in gold out cementing process - you need to let your "starting" HCl become "loaded" with gold ions & then you can make addition of HCl to dissolve more gold - but only to a point so that the HCl does not over come the nitric keeping the SS passive

This means that your ending AR solution has "a lot" of free nitric - that means a ton of sulfamic to de-Nox - or burn up a lot of copper to cement - or drop with hydrazine sulfate

Having access to &/or the price you pay for nitric is another factor

How I did the 8 lb batch the other day

Start - 2 beakers - 1 lb SS/GP each --- 400 ml nitric 12 ml (3%) HCl --- let react so HCl "loads" with Au - make 2 additions (per beaker) that brings HCl up to 5% --- decant - rinse/wash SS to another beaker (first lite rinse goes to decanted beaker - rest goes to another beaker)

Take decanted AR solution (started with 400 ml nitric) - ad 6 ml HCl (1.5%) ad to next 1 lb SS - make 2 additions HCl of 1.5 to 2 ml each addition

repeat that once more - (I went twice more but was gritting my teeth on exceeding the HCl on the 4th go round - but no problem) :mrgreen:

pour all rinse water in with main AR solution & evap back down some - recover gold as you prefer

Kurt

Edit to ad; - when I talk about using this on gold filled above - I am of course talking about gold filled SS


----------



## g_axelsson

I've used similar procedure for gold on aluminum. The same principle applies there as the high oxidizing power of the nitric passivates the aluminum.

It's not that big a secret. No one told me how to do it, with knowledge of how the acid and metal reactions works it becomes a normal conclusion when you think about the problem for a while.

Göran


----------



## Anonymous

There's a big difference between gold on Al Goran and gold on SS. It's more involved. You can actually recover the gold from Al using Nitric because of the copper base that's normally between the Al and the gold without the need to dissolve it in that one step. So you're effectively recovering gold flake (or you should be.)

The SS recovery with reverse AR does require a lot more care and attention to detail because it can run away with you rapidly and get extremely messy. As others have already pointed out it's also fun and games getting the gold out of a solution that's mostly Nitric 8) 8)


----------



## g_axelsson

Yeah, I understand that but the same principle is in work, the rest is up to the skill and experience of the refiner. But I guess that when you reach the tipping point between stable and unstable it's too late to do something... that gives you plenty of experience fast.

Gold on aluminum that is plated usually have copper as a base and is easily removed as gold flakes by pure nitric. But there are pieces with gold straight onto the aluminum, for example sputtered. I've encountered both types before.
Gold on copper on aluminum http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=19195&view=next#p194209
Gold directly on aluminum http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=19195&view=next#p194541

I've got another idea but I'll tell you more about it if it works out.

Göran


----------



## geedigity

So with the above mentioned process to remove gold from stainless steel, one thought that comes to mind, is that instead of just neutralizing the nitric acid with sulfamic acid, one could use the gold bearing "reversed AR solution" to then process other karat scrap to use up the nitric acid. 

I guess you would need karat scrap to process though.


----------



## JHS

Could you not just add some gold plated copper pins to use up the nitric?
That is if it's not a customer refining job.
john


----------



## Anonymous

Why would you want to contaminate the solution ?


----------



## modtheworld44

spaceships said:


> Why would you want to contaminate the solution ?



spaceships

Here's how I analyze that question in my own opinion.
When I start a process,I think to myself "This is just a recovery right now at this stage." I don't let the amount of contaminates dictate the use of my process,because I have the ability as a refiner to fix it later with a second or third refine.I have a video on my youtube channel that shows my variation of this process in action.My variation doesn't dissolve the gold unless you over balance the HCL.The base metals get dissolved instead and your left with gold foils.

Here's a picture I took the other day right after I finished calcining the gold powders.This is a step I use to help check my purity before I do the melt.From looking at the picture,what melt would you say I'm about to do the first or second?



modtheworld44


----------



## Anonymous

I've seen first refine at that colour that's really impure - especially when refined from Beryllium components. I have learned the hard way not to assume that the lighter the powder the purer it is. 

Like you I recover first. My point was that why would I recover from a pure source i.e. SS and then contaminate the reverse AR solution unnecessarily afterwards?


----------



## g_axelsson

This must be the first time I've heard someone talking about calcining gold powder. What exactly do you mean? Do you know what calcining means?

Göran


----------



## Anonymous

g_axelsson said:


> This must be the first time I've heard someone talking about calcining gold powder. What exactly do you mean? Do you know what calcining means?
> 
> Göran



I hadn't thought of that Goran. Bugger. Good point mate. 8) 8)


----------



## JHS

I see no reason not to use copper pins.Those are foils and would need a refine anyway.
john


----------



## Anonymous

Using reverse AR takes the gold into solution John. It doesn't touch the SS and leaves it clean. Effectively you have a small amount of very pregnant AuCl in a large quantity of Nitric. Contaminating the Nitric doesn't really serve a purpose.

Edit- why do I ALWAYS type Ag for Au- -- thanks ~Martyn for pointing it out!


----------



## JHS

I have spent many years refining silver and I know that silver will react some with nitric. Which means at least some silver has been dissolved prior to the addition of water.Since almost all stainless has some iron no matter how small the quantity ,I can't help but think it has at least a little contamination .If that is the case and it will need re refining ,then I see no reason not to put those expensive chemicals to use.If you are a learned refiner it should be no problem to deal with some copper.

As far as Mod's process.I spent 2.5 hours watching his ingenious process on Skype one day.I was so impressed that I set it up the next day ,and used it with great success.As a matter of fact I use it quite often now.
Once mod explained the logic of his process it was very easy to understand why it worked so well.Thanks mod for sharing.
john


----------



## jeneje

I agree with Jon (spaceships) Why would you want to add other metals into a already clean gold chloride? If you added pins to the solution you would be adding, copper, nickle, lead, tin and gold foils. With the solution being mostly HNO3, the main problem would become the tin forming metastannic acid, locking up the foils, creating a nightmare to recover. 

Even if you are a world class refiner, that just don't make any sense.

Ken
Edited, the other problem that might arise, depending on the amount of copper introduced, is the gold that is already in solution may start to precipitate back out as black powder creating an even bigger refining problem if metastannic acid does form.


----------



## kurtak

Guys - slow down & think a bit - there is more then one way to skin this cat --- part of that depends on if you are processing your own material or material for a client (& even if its for a client it depends on what material he gave you) the other part depends on what kind of material you have in your recovery/refining line up/circuit (if its your material)

We use copper to recover (cement) values all the time so (if you are working on your own material) why not use copper (or brass) plated material to use up the free nitric - the result is your gold cemented back from (reverse) AR - AND - gold foils (its now recovered gold form BOTH products - & you didn't need to use fresh acid to get your foils) filter it & go for the refine on the recovered gold --- just be sure you are using CLEAN brass & not bronze - a "little bit" of tin is not going hurt a thing  - a lot of tin is going to make a mess - so keep the bronze &/or large amounts of solder out of it - also keep gold plate or filled sterling out of it (due to the Ag/Cl problem)

When I do gold filled for my coin dealer buddy I first sort the SS (watch bands & eye glass frames) from all the other (& kick any GF 925 to the side) the bands & frames go to reverse AR - the reverse AR is then used to remove the base metals from the rest of HIS batch --- some times I need to use more nitric to rid all the base metal - some time I need to add some copper to finish cementing the gold - ether way the end result is all the gold from the batch recovered in a filter ready to go for refining

This batch (14.5 lbs) all SS & for a client dictates recovery (can't mix with anything else)

So you have options --- de-Nox nitric - sacrifice base metal (cementing) or use a reagent that will precip directly from free nitric solution

Its like when I use gold plated pins as my collector metal for smelting IC bonding wire from the ash (or SMDs or incinerated filters) --- why run 2 different processes when I can run one 

one more comment --- Jerry (modtheworld44) has in fact come up with a process "that works" - he is using it - he explained it to me & I understand it - he showed it to JHS by way of Skype & John is now using it - its "as fast" as nitric which makes it way faster then AP & does not use a lot of chem - he got kicked off Kens forum for posting "miss information" --- what a shame - Jerry as not as dumb as some think - keep in mind Jerry is the one that came up with the H2O cell for striping silver plate

Jerry may come up with some "totally crazy ideas" but he thinks & works them through - sometimes they fail - but twice now he has come up with "new" methods that work



> (quote by JHS) As far as Mod's process.I spent 2.5 hours watching his ingenious process on Skype one day.I was so impressed that I set it up the next day ,and used it with great success.As a matter of fact I use it quite often now.
> Once mod explained the logic of his process it was very easy to understand why it worked so well.Thanks mod for sharing.



As a matter of my personal opinion - you guys need to stop being so hard on Jerry - he's really not the nut case he might come across as being once you really get to know him --- (well OK - maybe just a little bit of a nut case - but he is not a bad guy) :mrgreen: :lol: 

He did give us the H2O silver stripping cell --- & he "might" even share this "new" process with us if you all weren't so hard on him

Sorry for hi jacking your thread Jerry (with the reverse AR thing)

Kurt


----------



## Anonymous

I'm not being hard on Jerry, I'm asking pertinent questions Kurt 8) 8) 

I'm genuinely intrigued!

Jon


----------



## modtheworld44

kurtak said:


> Guys - slow down & think a bit - there is more then one way to skin this cat --- part of that depends on if you are processing your own material or material for a client (& even if its for a client it depends on what material he gave you) the other part depends on what kind of material you have in your recovery/refining line up/circuit (if its your material)
> 
> We use copper to recover (cement) values all the time so (if you are working on your own material) why not use copper (or brass) plated material to use up the free nitric - the result is your gold cemented back from (reverse) AR - AND - gold foils (its now recovered gold form BOTH products - & you didn't need to use fresh acid to get your foils) filter it & go for the refine on the recovered gold --- just be sure you are using CLEAN brass & not bronze - a "little bit" of tin is not going hurt a thing  - a lot of tin is going to make a mess - so keep the bronze &/or large amounts of solder out of it - also keep gold plate or filled sterling out of it (due to the Ag/Cl problem)
> 
> When I do gold filled for my coin dealer buddy I first sort the SS (watch bands & eye glass frames) from all the other (& kick any GF 925 to the side) the bands & frames go to reverse AR - the reverse AR is then used to remove the base metals from the rest of HIS batch --- some times I need to use more nitric to rid all the base metal - some time I need to add some copper to finish cementing the gold - ether way the end result is all the gold from the batch recovered in a filter ready to go for refining
> 
> This batch (14.5 lbs) all SS & for a client dictates recovery (can't mix with anything else)
> 
> So you have options --- de-Nox nitric - sacrifice base metal (cementing) or use a reagent that will precip directly from free nitric solution
> 
> Its like when I use gold plated pins as my collector metal for smelting IC bonding wire from the ash (or SMDs or incinerated filters) --- why run 2 different processes when I can run one
> 
> one more comment --- Jerry (modtheworld44) has in fact come up with a process "that works" - he is using it - he explained it to me & I understand it - he showed it to JHS by way of Skype & John is now using it - its "as fast" as nitric which makes it way faster then AP & does not use a lot of chem - he got kicked off Kens forum for posting "miss information" --- what a shame - Jerry as not as dumb as some think - keep in mind Jerry is the one that came up with the H2O cell for striping silver plate
> 
> Jerry may come up with some "totally crazy ideas" but he thinks & works them through - sometimes they fail - but twice now he has come up with "new" methods that work
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (quote by JHS) As far as Mod's process.I spent 2.5 hours watching his ingenious process on Skype one day.I was so impressed that I set it up the next day ,and used it with great success.As a matter of fact I use it quite often now.
> Once mod explained the logic of his process it was very easy to understand why it worked so well.Thanks mod for sharing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As a matter of my personal opinion - you guys need to stop being so hard on Jerry - he's really not the nut case he might come across as being once you really get to know him --- (well OK - maybe just a little bit of a nut case - but he is not a bad guy) :mrgreen: :lol:
> 
> He did give us the H2O silver stripping cell --- & he "might" even share this "new" process with us if you all weren't so hard on him
> 
> Sorry for hi jacking your thread Jerry (with the reverse AR thing)
> 
> Kurt
Click to expand...



kurtak and JHS

Thank yall for the recognition and friendship you have provided me.I am lucky and grateful to know people like yall in my life time.

Kurtak I don't consider your post to be a hi-jacking,just a in depth knowledge lesson of a process you know and understand.You know me I'm all about learning new knowledge :mrgreen: . On another note,I re-thought that cell I came up with and will be testing the new idea today.I did some more research on the electrolyte I'm wanting to use.


modtheworld44


----------



## Anonymous

Might be similar to your product Jerry?


----------



## kurtak

modtheworld44 said:


> . On another note,I re-thought that cell I came up with and will be testing the new idea today.I did some more research on the electrolyte I'm wanting to use.
> 
> 
> modtheworld44



Jerry - don't do anything - until we talk on the phone again - I have something to point out you may not have thought of

I will call in an hour or two

Kurt


----------



## MarcoP

Spaceships, if I ever get one of them I'll frame it but if I get a box full I might refine it 

Good material to make a framed composition for bidding and devolve for a good cause, did I saw this before here.

Marco


----------



## JHS

In all my years in this world I have learned that the richest people on this planet are the ones that think out of the box.sometimes you have to see the tree,rather than the forest.
crazy sometimes = crazy like a fox.
john


----------



## modtheworld44

kurtak said:


> modtheworld44 said:
> 
> 
> 
> . On another note,I re-thought that cell I came up with and will be testing the new idea today.I did some more research on the electrolyte I'm wanting to use.
> 
> 
> modtheworld44
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jerry - don't do anything - until we talk on the phone again - I have something to point out you may not have thought of
> 
> I will call in an hour or two
> 
> Kurt
Click to expand...


kurtak

Not to worry,I haven't set the cell up yet.I did just test the wire in HCL and it passivated like I expected it to.I'm going to go ahead and melt the wire into a anode and wait for your call.Thanks for the quick contact.



modtheworld44


----------



## modtheworld44

JHS said:


> In all my years in this world I have learned that the richest people on this planet are the ones that think out of the box.sometimes you have to see the tree,rather than the forest.
> crazy sometimes = crazy like a fox.
> john



JHS

We so need a Like emoticon!!!! :mrgreen: 



modtheworld44


----------



## kurtak

kurtak said:


> one more comment --- Jerry (modtheworld44) has in fact come up with a process "that works" - he is using it - he explained it to me & I understand it - he showed it to JHS by way of Skype & John is now using it - its "as fast" as nitric which makes it way faster then AP & does not use a lot of chem - he got kicked off Kens forum for posting "miss information" --- what a shame - Jerry as not as dumb as some think - keep in mind Jerry is the one that came up with the H2O cell for striping silver plate



Just to be clear - in NO WAY - was I bad mouthing Kens forum with the above :!: --- Ken has a VERY good forum going as well - He &/or his forum Mods have the right to decide to ban a member just as happens from time to time here

I was simply making the statement that Jerry was banned - & that as a matter of my own personal opinion that was to bad because as much as Jerry can sometime be a bit off the hook - he also comes up with some good stuff

Ken --- SORRY if my first statement in any way sounded as if I was bad mouthing you &/or your forum - it was not my intent :!: you have a GREAT forum going :!: 

Kurt


----------



## modtheworld44

spaceships said:


> Might be similar to your product Jerry?



spaceships

My guess is processor blocks from microwave server racks of a higher application field,such as military or Nasa. I'm probably wrong but that's my guess.Will you share what they came from please?Thanks in advance.



modtheworld44


----------



## jeneje

kurtak said:


> kurtak said:
> 
> 
> 
> one more comment --- Jerry (modtheworld44) has in fact come up with a process "that works" - he is using it - he explained it to me & I understand it - he showed it to JHS by way of Skype & John is now using it - its "as fast" as nitric which makes it way faster then AP & does not use a lot of chem - he got kicked off Kens forum for posting "miss information" --- what a shame - Jerry as not as dumb as some think - keep in mind Jerry is the one that came up with the H2O cell for striping silver plate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just to be clear - in NO WAY - was I bad mouthing Kens forum with the above :!: --- Ken has a VERY good forum going as well - He &/or his forum Mods have the right to decide to ban a member just as happens from time to time here
> 
> I was simply making the statement that Jerry was banned - & that as a matter of my own personal opinion that was to bad because as much as Jerry can sometime be a bit off the hook - he also comes up with some good stuff
> 
> Ken --- SORRY if my first statement in any way sounded as if I was bad mouthing you &/or your forum - it was not my intent :!: you have a GREAT forum going :!:
> 
> Kurt
Click to expand...

Thank you for clearing this up Kurt. Jerry can be and most times is a pain. I agree he has some great ideas, Jerry's problem, is most of the time he tries to put the cart before the horse. If, he would slow down some and allow others to help him before he makes claims of something new, He could work out most of the bugs. 

I agree Kurt, Jerry is not Dumb, he plays Dumb. My question is Why???? All he has to do is be himself nothing more is expected from him. He has nothing to prove to anybody.

Jerry, I am not in NO WAY trying to be disrespectful here. 

Ken


----------



## MarcoP

modtheworld44 said:


> We so need a Like emoticon!!!! :mrgreen:
> 
> modtheworld44


As of today (a couple of years ago) there is no more need to use [stt]fiscal[/stt] actual images for emoticons.
Just change database table encoding to utf8mb4 and you can use straight away any of those Unicode "characters", supposing database connection is initiated as utf and the software send UTF charset encoding to the browser.

Still nothing you can do modtheworld, just saying.

Marco


----------



## Anonymous

Cool your jets lads, this is actually a really good thread, let's keep it on track fellas. 8) 8) 

Jerry - Enterprise carrier grade microwave telecoms kit mate.

Jon


----------



## modtheworld44

spaceships said:


> Cool your jets lads, this is actually a really good thread, let's keep it on track fellas. 8) 8)
> 
> Jerry - Enterprise carrier grade microwave telecoms kit mate.
> 
> Jon



spaceships

I agree,I would like to try and keep the integrity of this thread in tact this time around.My goal is to share my knowledge without getting beat in the head for doing so.I want the knowledge to exist beyond myself so others can use and expand on it if they so choose to.Without the knowledge that exists here in this great forum,I would not and could not be able to do what I do.

Here's the dimensions of my boxes in case yall wanted to know.

Big Box
2 5/8ins L
6/8ins W
2/8ins T

Small Box
2 1/8ins L
11/16ins W
2/8ins T

modtheworld44


----------



## 4metals

> This must be the first time I've heard someone talking about calcining gold powder. What exactly do you mean? Do you know what calcining means?



When doing a fire assay the fine gold resulting from the parting process is usually heated to a red heat before it is weighed. This is done to do a visual inspection as impurities (often PGM's) discolor the gold and it is obvious. This process is called annealing the gold. Perhaps this is what they meant when they said calcine.


----------



## kurtak

I have been very, very busy lately - hardly enough time to read let alone post but thought I would take time to post the results of the 14.5 lbs gold plated SS I talked about in this thread

The gold was first "recovered" from solution (after stripping from SS) by cementing with copper - then twice refined - first drop done with ferrous sulfate - second done with SMB

Gold delivered back to costumer - I was paid (cash) 20% spot - total working time on it about 12 -14 hours

I have a $300 minimum or 20% (which ever is greater) for this type material so made a bit more then the minimum

Kurt

Edit to ad; - round on right is 1 ozt round on left is remainder - customer had choice of gold poured as rounds or as bars


----------



## g_axelsson

Nice work and thanks for sharing!

8) 

Göran


----------



## 4metals

> The gold was first "recovered" from solution (after stripping from SS) by cementing with copper



I think this is a perfectly acceptable method in this case. I know that on this forum it may be considered a sacrilege to add base metals to a solution. This made me consider why we think that way, and I think I have got it worked out. 

If you were to be killing the excess nitric with copper and stopping short of cementation, yes that is indeed a bad technique. But you are using copper as a means of recovery not as a means of refining. The resultant cemented gold, which comes down pretty clean already, leaves a solution which tests easily with stannous chloride so it is easy to know when you have it all out. And without adding excess copper you should have very little contamination from other metals. Finely divided copper powder is perfect for this type of drop. Easy to add just enough to get the gold out but not too much to leave copper behind to mix with the gold.

The reason we do things like inquartation when applicable or other selective leaches, is to minimize the metals in solution when we drop the gold selectively with metabisulfite, SO2 or Ferrous Sulfate. The less metals in solution, the less drag down of impurities, the purer the precipitate. But in this case, the choice was either add 1200 grams of sulfamic acid (and in 800 ml of solution that would require heavy dilution) which would generate considerable waste, or recover the gold by cementation and redissolve the resultant metal (finely divided already so it dissolves quite easily) in 200 ml of Aqua Regia and recover the gold with a precipitant of choice. 

I think Kurt chose well!


----------



## Anonymous

I agree 4metals. Heck you're a chemist and might discount my agreement as irrelevant but regardless of that people need to look at practical solutions not theoretical ones.

Jon


----------



## 4metals

> Heck you're a chemist and might discount my agreement as irrelevant



The one thing life has taught me, and this forum has actually reinforced, is that there is value in everyone's opinion. Just because I'm a chemist doesn't mean I have tried every conceivable process to get to a desired endpoint. So I always listen to those marching to the beat of that different drummer. It can never hurt to listen.


----------



## Barren Realms 007

When in a similar situation as this thread I dropped my gold with SMB. 

Might want to revisit this post that is almost 3 years old and read it.

http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=6026&start=120#p87562


----------



## kurtak

4metals said:


> If you were to be killing the excess nitric with copper and stopping short of cementation, yes that is indeed a bad technique. But you are using copper as a means of recovery not as a means of refining. The resultant cemented gold, which comes down pretty clean already, leaves a solution which tests easily with stannous chloride so it is easy to know when you have it all out. And without adding excess copper you should have very little contamination from other metals. Finely divided copper powder is perfect for this type of drop. Easy to add just enough to get the gold out but not too much to leave copper behind to mix with the gold.




Correct on both points (underlined above) I used a copper bus bar simply because I have a couple hundred pounds of them & copper powder is expensive (though I also do have copper powder)

The point being that yes - you can actually stop the cementing process before all the free nitric is used up (so you do not have to consume copper to the point of no more free nitric) when you first add the copper to your (yellow) gold solution it shifts to green as the copper starts to go into solution 

Because of the "high" nitric concentration & the "low" HCl concentration (therefore the HCl being the "weaker" reacting acid) the copper goes into solution at a very rapid pace pushing the gold out & with the HCl being the weaker acid it really doesn't have time to re-dissolve the gold --- this reaction is very vigorous so I would be a bit concerned about using copper powder due to foam up & possible boil over - you would have to make your Cu powder additions slow & leave plenty of head room in your vessel

Anyway - you can somewhat tell when the gold is coming near to being all cemented out (though there is still free nitric) because the reaction starts to slow a bit & the color starts to shift from green to more blue --- its at this point that you want to start testing with stannous - it doesn't take long after the solution starts to shift to blue that you get a negative stannous test (2 or 3 maybe 4 tests)

once I get my negative stannous test I vacuum filter & water wash "right away" - even though the nitric was still reacting with the copper when the copper is pulled out & the solution is quit hot (from the reaction) & I don't give it time to settle --- doing this give any possible now "very" weak HCl little or no time to re-dissolve gold

Frank --- I think that may explain your question in the link to the thread you provided - in the first part of your process you were only trying to dissolve base metals with nitric --- but you also had "traces" of Cl in it so it dissolved "some" gold during the "extended" time & heat of the base metal dissolving reaction --- then when you hit it with SMB the SO2 dropped the gold even though you still had nitric - its just that the Cl was so weak it really didn't have the strength &/or time to re-dissolve the gold when you decanted &/or filtered the gold

Kurt


----------



## Barren Realms 007

That is what I figured too. I'm sure the trace amount of HCL that was on the chips had been used up and I'm pretty sure the nitric had been exhausted as well.


----------



## g_axelsson

I've been thinking in similar tracks for some years now, how to remove the gold from nitric acid without destroying the nitric acid in the process...

This is so far a purely theoretical solution. I haven't had the opportunity to test my theory yet.

The clue is to get rid of all chloride ions so the gold doesn't redissolve. As long as you have gold chloride or other soluble chlorides there exists free chloride ions in solution and with the nitric acid it can be seen as free hydrochloric acid.
Now, we have one easily acquired chemical that removes virtually all free chloride ions from a solution, silver nitrate. If we mix silver nitrate into our leach until no more silver chloride is formed then we have a chloride free gold nitrate solution.
From this we can drop the gold with SMB, SO2 or possibly even electrowinning.

When the gold is gone from the solution the only thing left to do is to add a bit of hydrochloric acid again and then continue to use the reverse aqua regia.

Using SMB / SO2 will probably add small amounts of sulfuric acid to the mix and that could be a problem with nitric acid. Electrowinning the gold would not add any contaminants.

Anyone sees a problem with this process?

The gold would probably need to be refined again to remove palladium if SMB / SO2 is used. Electrowinning will probably also give a mixed product of gold, silver and copper.

As a byproduct this would produce a solution with both gold and silver in solution... and whatever Harold says I think there is another way to have both silver and gold in solution besides using cyanide. :mrgreen: 

Meet hydrogen tetranitroaurate(III)






Göran


----------



## Barren Realms 007

g_axelsson said:


> I've been thinking in similar tracks for some years now, how to remove the gold from nitric acid without destroying the nitric acid in the process...
> 
> This is so far a purely theoretical solution. I haven't had the opportunity to test my theory yet.
> 
> The clue is to get rid of all chloride ions so the gold doesn't redissolve. As long as you have gold chloride or other soluble chlorides there exists free chloride ions in solution and with the nitric acid it can be seen as free hydrochloric acid.
> Now, we have one easily acquired chemical that removes virtually all free chloride ions from a solution, silver nitrate. If we mix silver nitrate into our leach until no more silver chloride is formed then we have a chloride free gold nitrate solution.
> From this we can drop the gold with SMB, SO2 or possibly even electrowinning.
> 
> When the gold is gone from the solution the only thing left to do is to add a bit of hydrochloric acid again and then continue to use the reverse aqua regia.
> 
> Using SMB / SO2 will probably add small amounts of sulfuric acid to the mix and that could be a problem with nitric acid. Electrowinning the gold would not add any contaminants.
> 
> Anyone sees a problem with this process?
> 
> The gold would probably need to be refined again to remove palladium if SMB / SO2 is used. Electrowinning will probably also give a mixed product of gold, silver and copper.
> 
> As a byproduct this would produce a solution with both gold and silver in solution... and whatever Harold says I think there is another way to have both silver and gold in solution besides using cyanide. :mrgreen:
> 
> Meet hydrogen tetranitroaurate(III)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Göran



As far as I know using SMB will not produce sulphuric acid. Adding sulfamic acid to remove the nitric will though.


----------



## g_axelsson

I think that the SMB reaction in nitric would turn into something like...

With gold chloride : 3 NaHSO3 + 3 H2O + 2 HAuCl4 = 3 NaHSO4 + 8 HCl + 2 Au

With gold nitrate : 3 NaHSO3 + 3 H2O + 2 HAu(NO3)4 = 3 NaHSO4 + 8 HNO3 + 2 Au

The NaHSO4 dissolved in acidic solution would correspond to at least a weak sulfuric acid. H+ + HSO4-

Göran


----------



## Lou

Goran,

The silver doesn't quite work (see freechemist post where I myself got schooled by the late Professor) unless conditions are super tightly controlled. There is another way.

We use tributyl phosphate for Au(III) and then resin for Pt/Pd.


----------



## g_axelsson

Thanks Lou, I'll dig that post up. 8) 

I surely miss FreeChemist, I've learned a lot from him.

Göran


----------



## justinhcase

Has any one run the comparative cost's on each method.
I still proffer a good rotary evaporator to trying short cut's.
Sulfamic is handy for small quantity's and so you only need to reduce down once as I do.
Solvent extraction is good also and help's with high purity refinement. 
"Versenol 120" made by Dow chemical looks very interesting as it is meant to let you drop form a solution with 50% nitric acid .but it is a bit pricey.Has any one tried it and compared cost's?
Cost's are not an issue at the moment,but when you look at scaling up even a slight saving could mean the difference between having a stable business and going hungry. 
But it is the simplicity of evaporation I am drawn to and the reduction of low solubility impurity's is a bonus,apart form specialist precipitant's the other solution's add complication to the process and require intensive work,where as a batch evaporating can just be left to reduce down by it's self while you get on with other work so increases productivity.


----------



## modtheworld44

justinhcase said:


> Has any one run the comparative cost's on each method.
> I still proffer a good rotary evaporator to trying short cut's.
> Sulfamic is handy for small quantity's and so you only need to reduce down once as I do.
> Solvent extraction is good also and help's with high purity refinement.
> "Versenol 120" made by Dow chemical looks very interesting as it is meant to let you drop form a solution with 50% nitric acid .but it is a bit pricey.Has any one tried it and compared cost's?
> Cost's are not an issue at the moment,but when you look at scaling up even a slight saving could mean the difference between having a stable business and going hungry.
> But it is the simplicity of evaporation I am drawn to and the reduction of low solubility impurity's is a bonus,apart form specialist precipitant's the other solution's add complication to the process and require intensive work,where as a batch evaporating can just be left to reduce down by it's self while you get on with other work so increases productivity.




justinhcase


I have done many comparisons in my head,I just made $1368.14 on this gold at a spot of $1149.70.I used about $25.00 in chemicals and reagents to refine it,to me that's a great price for what I made and I still have some supplies left.I did 72 pieces of the boxes in this thread,which was around 13-14lbs total.It would have taken at least a gallon or better of nitric to do the same batch.The average price for nitric these days vary dramatically depending on whether you have good or bad access to it.The variation of this process that I choose to use gives me several options to use depending on what type materials I run through it.It all comes down to process preference in the end for me and the speed in which it allows me to turn over my gold.I don't know if this is the type of comparison you are looking for,this is just my opinion on the things I look at when I compare things of this nature.Thanks in advance.



modtheworld44


----------



## JHS

Very nice 8)


----------



## Anonymous

Jerry, what percentage purity did that gold come out at? 

Jon


----------



## modtheworld44

spaceships said:


> Jerry, what percentage purity did that gold come out at?
> 
> Jon



spaceships

I can't say for sure because my buyer only pays up to 98% of a 99% flat purity which puts it at 97%net.So regardless of how many 9's purity I get it past that I still get the same,this past trip he told me that he also does lock ins on spot price if I want to go that way.I told him that I'm not that greedy and that as long as the spot price was above what it was when I purchased the original material that I was with not locking it in.

What purity would you say it was? That's not the best looking gold I've ever done,just the bigest melt I've done at one time.Thanks in advance.


P.S you should call me some time to talk.



modtheworld44


----------



## kurtak

spaceships said:


> Jerry, what percentage purity did that gold come out at?
> 
> Jon



If your asking Jerry because the color looks off - that could be a matter of lighting - if you look at the first two pics compared to the third pic the color is very different

The color of the first two as well as the color of the third does not look right but the comparison of the color "difference" shows how deceiving lighting in a pic can be for judging purity based on a pic

Same as here :arrow: http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=22904#p240270 --- were Geo commented on the color being off - but if you look at the pics of the gold in his hand & the color of the gold on the black back ground you see very different color of the same gold

So its not that the gold its self is off - but rather that the lighting in the pic is throwing the color off

Edit to add; - I often have to take several pics different angles &/or back grounds to get one I like for posting 

Kurt


----------



## Anonymous

It's no biggie Kurt I was checking because the gold didn't look particularly pure and Jerry had sold it so a reference percentage would have been useful to know. It might have been 98 percent or 88 percent I don't know- I was just genuinely interested on a personal level 8) 8)


----------



## kurtak

justinhcase said:


> Has any one run the comparative cost's on each method.
> I still proffer a good rotary evaporator to trying short cut's.
> Sulfamic is handy for small quantity's and so you only need to reduce down once as I do.
> Solvent extraction is good also and help's with high purity refinement.
> "Versenol 120" made by Dow chemical looks very interesting as it is meant to let you drop form a solution with 50% nitric acid .but it is a bit pricey.Has any one tried it and compared cost's?
> Cost's are not an issue at the moment,but when you look at scaling up even a slight saving could mean the difference between having a stable business and going hungry.
> But it is the simplicity of evaporation I am drawn to and the reduction of low solubility impurity's is a bonus,apart form specialist precipitant's the other solution's add complication to the process and require intensive work,where as a batch evaporating can just be left to reduce down by it's self while you get on with other work so increases productivity.



Justin - sorry for the delay in responding but I have been "very" bussy

I don't think it is so much a question of cost of one method over that of another - rather it is more like Jerry pointed out (speaking of "his" process)


> The variations of this process that I choose to use gives me several options to use depending on what type materials I run through it. It all comes down to process preference in the end for me and the speed in which it allows me to turn over my gold



In other words it really comes down to what you have going on in your particular situation - things like are you processing your own material or someone else's - how much material are you processing - is it material you get on a regular bases or only from time to time & are the lots you get to process large or small - etc.

Examples -------

This batch of GP 0n SS was a one time small batch - am I going to go buy a product like Versenol 120 to drop my gold in such a case - no - on the other hand if I was getting this material in on a regular bases & in large quantity's I would most certainly look into that as "an option" --- this option might cost more money wise - but on large & regular material for a customer it would pay for its self time wise & allow for timely return payment to the customer

You mention using a rotovap & that is certainly an option with the benefit of being able to recover your nitric for reuse - the down side is it would take forever if you were working on large batches on a regular bases for a customer - so its not practical for getting the job done to make a timely return payment to the customer - Versenol 120 would be the better option

If its your own material (GP on SS) & you have a lot of GP pins to process then using the pins to cement the gold makes sense because you kill two birds with one stone --- you recover the gold from the reverse AR as well as recover the foils from the pins

If its a small batch one time thing & you don't have copper for cementing sulfamic might be the answer

I choose copper cementing because (1) it was a small batch (2) I have LOTS of copper (& it only took about $3 worth) & (3) it only took about an hour to "recover" the gold to then go for refining --- so it was cheap - & fast allowing to make timely return to the customer --- & as I explained here :arrow: http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=22916&start=30#p240874 --- I still have free nitric which I will "finish" using up to recover foils from pins or fingers

Or as I explained here :arrow: http://goldrefiningforum.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=22916#p240544 --- cementing just makes good sense

The point being that what you have/get &/or who it belongs to &/or how it fits into your processing circuit all play a greater roll in deciding method options then the cost of one method over another

Kurt


----------



## kurtak

spaceships said:


> It's no biggie Kurt I was checking because the gold didn't look particularly pure and Jerry had sold it so a reference percentage would have been useful to know. It might have been 98 percent or 88 percent I don't know- I was just genuinely interested on a personal level 8) 8)



Jon - its all good :mrgreen: 

Your question about the purity of Jerry's gold just gave me the opportunity to say something about judging gold purity based on the color in a pic 

All to often I have heard the comment - "what's the purity - the color looks off"

Judging purity based on the color in a pic just doesn't hold a lot of water for making a judgment call - to many factors that can make the color "look" off - type of lighting the pic is take under - back ground - angle the pic is taken from - all of which can make bad gold "look" good - or good gold "look" bad

Kurt


----------



## Barren Realms 007

kurtak said:


> spaceships said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's no biggie Kurt I was checking because the gold didn't look particularly pure and Jerry had sold it so a reference percentage would have been useful to know. It might have been 98 percent or 88 percent I don't know- I was just genuinely interested on a personal level 8) 8)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jon - its all good :mrgreen:
> 
> Your question about the purity of Jerry's gold just gave me the opportunity to say something about judging gold purity based on the color in a pic
> 
> All to often I have heard the comment - "what's the purity - the color looks off"
> 
> Judging purity based on the color in a pic just doesn't hold a lot of water for making a judgment call - to many factors that can make the color "look" off - type of lighting the pic is take under - back ground - angle the pic is taken from - all of which can make bad gold "look" good - or good gold "look" bad
> 
> Kurt
Click to expand...


I agree wit that 100%.

Looking at the picture he posted, that slag on top is not too dirty so I would say he is running at least .98 on the button and more than likely he is setting at .995.

Nice job Jerry.


----------



## modtheworld44

Barren Realms 007 said:


> kurtak said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> spaceships said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's no biggie Kurt I was checking because the gold didn't look particularly pure and Jerry had sold it so a reference percentage would have been useful to know. It might have been 98 percent or 88 percent I don't know- I was just genuinely interested on a personal level 8) 8)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jon - its all good :mrgreen:
> 
> Your question about the purity of Jerry's gold just gave me the opportunity to say something about judging gold purity based on the color in a pic
> 
> All to often I have heard the comment - "what's the purity - the color looks off"
> 
> Judging purity based on the color in a pic just doesn't hold a lot of water for making a judgment call - to many factors that can make the color "look" off - type of lighting the pic is take under - back ground - angle the pic is taken from - all of which can make bad gold "look" good - or good gold "look" bad
> 
> Kurt
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree wit that 100%.
> 
> Looking at the picture he posted, that slag on top is not too dirty so I would say he is running at least .98 on the button and more than likely he is setting at .995.
> 
> Nice job Jerry.
Click to expand...


kurtak

You said that the best way possible,in my opinion.The pictures didn't do that button any justice.Thank you!!!!


Barren Realms 007

Thanks for the compliment on the gold.....but there wasn't any slag on that button.LOL



modtheworld44


----------



## Barren Realms 007

Jerry,

This is a no slag button.




Even being off on the heating where your button doesn't get completely round and with excellent purity your button will come out like this, not with a dirty surface like your picture shows. I'm trying to give you a complement and you want to tell me I'm wrong when the pictures tell the difference. After doing this 200-300 times you learn the difference. Even the less experienced members will see the difference and it doesn't do them justice or teach them anything to contradict that information.

I agree and understand not to try for .999 purity when you are only going to get paid for .98 purity regardless of what you produce and I would do the same thing if I were in your position.

I'm not trying to bring you down or anything honestly.


----------



## modtheworld44

Barren Realms 007 said:


> Jerry,
> 
> This is a no slag button.
> 
> 
> 
> Even being off on the heating where your button doesn't get completely round and with excellent purity your button will come out like this, not with a dirty surface like your picture shows. I'm trying to give you a complement and you want to tell me I'm wrong when the pictures tell the difference. After doing this 200-300 times you learn the difference. Even the less experienced members will see the difference and it doesn't do them justice or teach them anything to contradict that information.
> 
> I agree and understand not to try for .999 purity when you are only going to get paid for .98 purity regardless of what you produce and I would do the same thing if I were in your position.
> 
> I'm not trying to bring you down or anything honestly.



Barren Realms 007

I honestly know you were not trying to bring me down,I think the confusion is coming from the way your meaning the word "slag".When I use slag,it means "borax and oxidized basemetals left over forming a hard surface area on top of the melt".Which picture do you see the slag in?Thanks in advance.



modtheworld44


----------



## Barren Realms 007

modtheworld44 said:


> Barren Realms 007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Jerry,
> 
> This is a no slag button.
> 
> 
> 
> Even being off on the heating where your button doesn't get completely round and with excellent purity your button will come out like this, not with a dirty surface like your picture shows. I'm trying to give you a complement and you want to tell me I'm wrong when the pictures tell the difference. After doing this 200-300 times you learn the difference. Even the less experienced members will see the difference and it doesn't do them justice or teach them anything to contradict that information.
> 
> I agree and understand not to try for .999 purity when you are only going to get paid for .98 purity regardless of what you produce and I would do the same thing if I were in your position.
> 
> I'm not trying to bring you down or anything honestly.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Barren Realms 007
> 
> I honestly know you were not trying to bring me down,I think the confusion is coming from the way your meaning the word "slag".When I use slag,it means "borax and oxidized basemetals left over forming a hard surface area on top of the melt".Which picture do you see the slag in?Thanks in advance.
> 
> 
> 
> modtheworld44
Click to expand...


I'm referring to the top picture of the top of your button.


----------



## justinhcase

I have done many comparisons in my head,I just made $1368.14 on this gold at a spot of $1149.70.I used about $25.00 in chemicals and reagents to refine it,to me that's a great price for what I made and I still have some supplies left.I did 72 pieces of the boxes in this thread,which was around 13-14lbs total.It would have taken at least a gallon or better of nitric to do the same batch.The average price for nitric these days vary dramatically depending on whether you have good or bad access to it.The variation of this process that I choose to use gives me several options to use depending on what type materials I run through it.It all comes down to process preference in the end for me and the speed in which it allows me to turn over my gold.I don't know if this is the type of comparison you are looking for,this is just my opinion on the things I look at when I compare things of this nature.Thanks in advance.

Dear modtheworld44
For the stainless steel I am running I have to use about a liter for every kilo I want to run.
There being as little as four gram's of Au in the one kilo of material the total soon add up.
Any thing to cut down processing time or cost's help's a lot with what I am doing.
Nice recovery.
Regards
Justin


----------



## Anonymous

I recall a time where I would try my hardest to get the first refine as pure as possible. This worked very well when I was processing very small batches of gold. Once the batches of raw material get larger it simply isn't financially practicable to get it pure in the first "shot." You end up with larger dirty solutions that you literally load with more and more gold but using the same AR multiple times otherwise you price yourself out of profit. I've run 10Kg+ of ceramics through the same solution on a number of occasions, adding more HCl and Nitric as required. I'd rather have 4l of waste than 20l.

Needless to say, that first drop is usually pretty "manky" if you pardon the Brit term and I never melt that gold. I simply pool it all together over a few days, give it a basic quick clean up using Lou's process and then truly refine it all together again as one. 

I guess effectively that's using the first AR dissolve as a simple recovery. Something I would not have done in my early days, but something I have come to do as habit.

Jerry, personally I would have taken the powder that you used to create that button and given it a quick re-refine before melting it because I don't like pimpled buttons but that's my own choice. Everyone is different, and that's what makes life interesting. 8) 8)


----------



## justinhcase

personally I never let any of my Au go out until it is presentable.A matter of my personal pride over economics.
But I do have a number of client's who never give me the time to refine,they insist I melt it for them straight from recovery.
To my surprise they still get 98.5% of spot for it.
There are some who do not care what it look's like.


----------



## 911Met

Here is the metal value of 'smart phones.


----------



## richard2013

Is that really true 1 IPhone unit will have 1.5$ gold? :shock:


----------



## Anonymous

richard2013 said:


> Is that really true 1 IPhone unit will have 1.5$ gold? :shock:



Some will do yes. It's very brand and age dependent. From that money you have to deduct the cost of processing them though, and your time factors in to that.


----------



## justinhcase

richard2013 said:


> Is that really true 1 IPhone unit will have 1.5$ gold? :shock:


I am surprised apple use that much.
I can not see a way of processing 99% of electronic waste economically,small traders need to work together to build large loads.
It is easy enough to keep track of how meany kilos came from each source ,so if ten small traders could out put five tun's a month they would have access to the large refinery's who have the most efficient smelting process .
Luckily I was approached by one of the largest group's in the U.K. or i would not even look at it my self.
As it is all I have to do is brake equipment down into ruff lot's of a tun each into dump bag's they do all the hard work.
People never look at the actual hourly amount of income they are actual achieving,most would find they are better off working in McD's than trying to process E-waste.


----------

