# Very interesting Gold stripper...



## 9kuuby9 (Jun 13, 2013)

hello guys; I have stumbled upon this!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sxJwJz-6cg[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EaKWIzW3Zs[/youtube]

Additional information; http://uwin-nano.com/en/product.php?cat=4&sm=2
http://www.greentaiwan.tw/en_US/product/info.html?id=64478165B858681162F4C6A71D08A94D

A company located in Taiwan who has a secret formula?; which is apparently not dangerous to come in touch with...

they also sell solutions which strip; Au, Ag, Pd, Sn and Ni. they apparently don't use AR or Cyanide or sulfuric acid!?

Does anyone have the slightest idea what they might be using?

This has been around since September 2011.


----------



## squarecoinman (Jun 13, 2013)

9kuuby9 said:


> hello guys; I have stumbled upon this!
> 
> [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sxJwJz-6cg[/youtube]
> [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EaKWIzW3Zs[/youtube]
> ...



I have no idea what it is , but I am interested if this could cut out AR and other dangerous stuff it would be interesting to look in to the PH of the liquid is 7.4 slightly higher then water ( 7 ph ) The PH of pool water is 7.4 due to the chlorine. I hope some member here can help 

scm


----------



## Geo (Jun 13, 2013)

just because some one pokes HIS fingers in some proprietary solution without it taking the skin off doesnt mean that its harmless.if i could become a millionaire by exposing my hand to a dangerous chemical a couple of times to make a video, thats the price you pay to be wealthy.


----------



## 9kuuby9 (Jun 13, 2013)

Geo said:


> just because some one pokes HIS fingers in some proprietary solution without it taking the skin off doesnt mean that its harmless.if i could become a millionaire by exposing my hand to a dangerous chemical a couple of times to make a video, thats the price you pay to be wealthy.



you might be right Geo; I've noticed orange nitric splashes on his fingers?

He might be using a very dilute yet dangerous chemical.


----------



## rusty (Jun 13, 2013)

Novel Technologies has filed patents in Taiwan, China and the US, a google guru would have no problem ferreting out the formula for UW-700 Gold Stripper.


----------



## bswartzwelder (Jun 13, 2013)

They claim their UW-860 model is "(World's only) UW-860 Gold (Au) stripper (Non Aqua Regia, Cyanide free). This to me seems like a blatant lie. Also, I didn't read far enough into it to discern the differences between the UW-860 model and the UW-700 model. It would appear to be a spin off from the Shor Simplicity system WITHOUT the semi permeable cell. All they showed was a beaker with a red wire connected to a black clip, a liquid inside the beaker, and gold apparently disappearing from a circuit board. They didn't show the gold being deposited anywhere. Normal protocol in the electronics industry would be a black wire connected to a black clip. Red wires usually denote a positive volage in DC circuits and should have been connected to a red clip. Black clips usually have black wires connected to them and are the negative terminal. Look at the battery clips and battery connection wires on your car. In the Shor system, the electrolyte is ammonium chloride and salt dissolved in water. I also didn't see a price on any of this. 

Since the gold was stripped from the circuit board foils, it had to go somewhere. Either into solution or deposited on the negative terminal (cathode). The cell in the Shor system keeps the gold from redepositing itself on the cathode. In the UW-700, if the gold was stripped from the anode and redeposited on the cathode, what have you accomplished? The gold is still plated onto a piece of metal where it will have to removed AGAIN. You just changed the base metal from a copper substrate to what appears to be a lead cathode. AP will remove the copper substrate and the gold plating will fall off. PLEASE correct me if I am wrong. The last thing I want to do is pass on bad information. Maybe looks are deceiving in this instance.

One last thought. Every reverse electroplating cell I've ever seen needs the gold to be clean. The printed circuit boards in the video had NO components, and NO solder on them. How many of us deal with circuit boards which are THAT clean?


----------



## butcher (Jun 13, 2013)

In the kitchen with children playing in the background, electrolysis with some compound (gases form with most all electrolytes even if it is just saltwater, no real information in the video, but total disregard for safety, I did not learn a thing, and only seen someone who needs to study more on the safety issues of recovery.

Kind of sounds like Shore selling saltwater as a magic potion to recover gold, just the saltwater has some fancy name to disguise it, and of course you can only buy it from them it would not cost too much for this propitiatory chemical, and they have a phone number when everything goes wrong...


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 26, 2013)

bswartzwelder said:


> They claim their UW-860 model is "(World's only) UW-860 Gold (Au) stripper (Non Aqua Regia, Cyanide free). This to me seems like a blatant lie. Also, I didn't read far enough into it to discern the differences between the UW-860 model and the UW-700 model. It would appear to be a spin off from the Shor Simplicity system WITHOUT the semi permeable cell. All they showed was a beaker with a red wire connected to a black clip, a liquid inside the beaker, and gold apparently disappearing from a circuit board. They didn't show the gold being deposited anywhere. Normal protocol in the electronics industry would be a black wire connected to a black clip. Red wires usually denote a positive volage in DC circuits and should have been connected to a red clip. Black clips usually have black wires connected to them and are the negative terminal. Look at the battery clips and battery connection wires on your car. In the Shor system, the electrolyte is ammonium chloride and salt dissolved in water. I also didn't see a price on any of this.
> 
> Since the gold was stripped from the circuit board foils, it had to go somewhere. Either into solution or deposited on the negative terminal (cathode). The cell in the Shor system keeps the gold from redepositing itself on the cathode. In the UW-700, if the gold was stripped from the anode and redeposited on the cathode, what have you accomplished? The gold is still plated onto a piece of metal where it will have to removed AGAIN. You just changed the base metal from a copper substrate to what appears to be a lead cathode. AP will remove the copper substrate and the gold plating will fall off. PLEASE correct me if I am wrong. The last thing I want to do is pass on bad information. Maybe looks are deceiving in this instance.
> 
> One last thought. Every reverse electroplating cell I've ever seen needs the gold to be clean. The printed circuit boards in the video had NO components, and NO solder on them. How many of us deal with circuit boards which are THAT clean?



I am not so sure the gold would necessarily be plated onto the cathode. If you read the article I posted on the thread regarding the Shor System (Chemical Processes) entitled "Electrolytic Precipitation of Gold" from the 1890's, you will see they were able to deposit gold from a chlorine solution at the cathode and the particles of gold merely fell to the bottom of the cell.

As can be seen in the second video, the gold is not in solution, as it is all caught in the filter cloth while the electrolyte ends up below.


----------



## ericrm (Jun 26, 2013)

at 1:30 you see the second clip beeing deposited on the table while he remove the gold plated strip ... it is some kind of leach by electrolisys ... no use for escrap in the real world... but i still wonder what it is


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 26, 2013)

Could be just salt water. Without a membrane between the anode and cathode, this cell would be making a mixture of sodium hypochlorite/hypochlorous acid or, if the temperature got above 50° Celsius, a mixture of sodium chlorate/chloric acid. Either one, with the presence of sodium chloride, might be able to put gold into solution and deposit it in the vicinity of the cathode.


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 26, 2013)

Here is something that was designed in Brazil by a company by the name of CETEM. It was part of a program to help artisanal miners in Third World countries to reduce their dependency on mercury for recovering fine gold. I have tried everything short of a private detective to get any more information on this process than what is seen on the two pages below. Outside of the basic design and a Brazilian patent (in Portugese, no less), CETEM does not appear to have pursued this idea. 

I do know that DC current applied via a cathode and an anode to a cell full of salt water will, below 50° Celsius, produce sodium hypochlorite (NaClO) bleach (Clorox) and, between 50-70° Celsius, sodium chlorate (NaClO3). The diagram shows chlorine gas (Cl2) being produced at the anode and, while this is technically true, it exists only momentarily as chlorine gas prior to becoming sodium hypochlorite or chlorate.

Also, the solution must be agitated and in this case a set of paddles turned by a motor are shown. A revolving drum would be even better but the logistics of connecting an anode and cathode to a revolving drum are somewhat intimidating.







As some of you will likely point out, unless the gold is somewhat attached to the cathode, there is nothing to stop the precipitated gold from rejoining the ore below the cathode. Some way of isolating the cathode (bag? porous cup?) would be necessary to make this a success.

Oh, and the anode. From what I've been able to research, anything less than a titanium or platinum anode will get eaten up fairly quickly.


----------



## bswartzwelder (Jun 27, 2013)

I would think a titanium or platinum anode of the size needed for this device could be relatively expensive. I would guess much more than the cost of mercury. If the miners were smart, they could make a condenser and reuse the mercury rather than letting it boil off into the atmosphere poisoning everything it comes in contact with. From the directions, it say it uses 170 kwh of electricity per ton of ore. I would hope the ore is a very high grade to offset these costs.


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 27, 2013)

bswartzwelder said:


> I would think a titanium or platinum anode of the size needed for this device could be relatively expensive. I would guess much more than the cost of mercury. If the miners were smart, they could make a condenser and reuse the mercury rather than letting it boil off into the atmosphere poisoning everything it comes in contact with. From the directions, it say it uses 170 kwh of electricity per ton of ore. I would hope the ore is a very high grade to offset these costs.




Read it again. It says 170 kwh per kilogram of Au (gold). At 2.2 lbs. per kilogram and 12 Troy ounces per pound, 2.2 x 12 = 26.4 Troy oz. At $1223/ounce, this is $22,287.20. We pay $.08/ kwh here. $.08 x 170 = $13.60. Cost effective, I should think.

Here is a link to an Ebay page for a titanium bar. Not that expensive at $25.00. If one was only processing concentrate, this would be more than adequate. 

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/Titanium-plate-Ti-6-4-TITANIUM-93-VANADIUM-4-650-gr-/281124886644?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4174595874


----------



## Geo (Jun 27, 2013)

actually, the anode and cathode can be graphite. the oxidizing agent is the sodium hypoclorite - chlorate. as it is electrolysis, the water gets broken down into hydrogen+oxygen while the sodium chloride is decomposed. this is basically the same as HCl/Cl. the problem with this is, it will dissolve almost all the metal present. to get a good clean solution, you would need to remove as many different metal as possible first. in the case of Heap Leaching, the solution is treated with electrolysis and then sprayed onto the heap and then collected and pumped into a collector (electrowinning).


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 27, 2013)

Geo said:


> actually, the anode and cathode can be graphite. the oxidizing agent is the sodium hypoclorite - chlorate. as it is electrolysis, the water gets broken down into hydrogen+oxygen while the sodium chloride is decomposed. this is basically the same as HCl/Cl. the problem with this is, it will dissolve almost all the metal present. to get a good clean solution, you would need to remove as many different metal as possible first. in the case of Heap Leaching, the solution is treated with electrolysis and then sprayed onto the heap and then collected and pumped into a collector (electrowinning).




While this may be similar in some fashions to the HCl/Cl process, there is a great difference in that the solution does not go acidic and very likely is slightly basic. If base metals are in the form of oxides, as they often are in ore (black sands), the bond between oxygen and base metal will not be broken in a solution of neutral pH.


----------



## pgms4me (Jun 27, 2013)

Geo said:


> actually, the anode and cathode can be graphite. the oxidizing agent is the sodium hypoclorite - chlorate. as it is electrolysis, the water gets broken down into hydrogen+oxygen while the sodium chloride is decomposed. this is basically the same as HCl/Cl. the problem with this is, it will dissolve almost all the metal present. to get a good clean solution, you would need to remove as many different metal as possible first. in the case of Heap Leaching, the solution is treated with electrolysis and then sprayed onto the heap and then collected and pumped into a collector (electrowinning).


 


Your right on Geo' I have used the salt water cell because it dissolves all the metal(even platinum). You do have the problem of having to selectively get all the metals out,On a small scale i have found that it only works good if you keep no more than 2 ounces of scrap to about 1/2 gallon of salt water. I have found the salt water solution needs to be a saturated as possible. I would not use sea salt,the other elements can cause havoc in dropping some of the metals, depending on your scrap,of course. I used a flower pot for a membrane. if your going to try this,I would reccomend getting rid of as much base metals beforehand as possible with a clean method like HCL and hydrogen peroxide pretreatment. the good thing is salt is cheap.. Lots of good EDM graphite electrode material on ebay cheap!


----------



## FrugalRefiner (Jun 27, 2013)

I don't know if he still has any available, but jonn had graphite at very good price. Search his posts or PM him.

Dave


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 27, 2013)

pgms4me said:


> Geo said:
> 
> 
> > actually, the anode and cathode can be graphite. the oxidizing agent is the sodium hypoclorite - chlorate. as it is electrolysis, the water gets broken down into hydrogen+oxygen while the sodium chloride is decomposed. this is basically the same as HCl/Cl. the problem with this is, it will dissolve almost all the metal present. to get a good clean solution, you would need to remove as many different metal as possible first. in the case of Heap Leaching, the solution is treated with electrolysis and then sprayed onto the heap and then collected and pumped into a collector (electrowinning).
> ...



Interesting. Will it break the bonds of the oxides in black sand (magnetite, haematite) and put the iron into solution?


----------



## Harold_V (Jun 28, 2013)

Traveller11 said:


> Read it again. It says 170 kwh per kilogram of Au (gold). At 2.2 lbs. per kilogram and 12 Troy ounces per pound, 2.2 x 12 = 26.4 Troy oz. At $1223/ounce, this is $22,287.20. We pay $.08/ kwh here. $.08 x 170 = $13.60. Cost effective, I should think.


There's a little problem with your math. 

You made mention of 2.2 lbs/kilogram. You also said that there's 12 troy ounces per pound, which is true if you're discussing a troy pound, but we aren't. 

Lets talk grains. 

An avoirdupois pound contains 7,000 grains, with the AV ounce containing 437.5 grains. A troy pound contains 5,760 grains, with the troy ounce containing 480 grains, so while an AV ounce is smaller than a troy ounce, the troy pound is, likewise, smaller than the AV pound. 

Assuming the 2.2 kg translates to troy ounces, you'd have 32.08 troy ounces, not 26.4. Quite a difference.

Harold


----------



## freechemist (Jun 28, 2013)

The following is my personal view and opinion, and not to be regarded as a hard fact. In my view the video about the UW700 Gold stripping process is simply a blatant fake, produced by at least two persons, working it out. To underline my view, I took some shots of the Video and attach them here as a pdf-file.

Regards, freechemist


----------



## bswartzwelder (Jun 28, 2013)

Harold,

I like your reply. I totally missed the kg in the ratio 170 kwh/kg. 

I have won quite a few bets with friends since I joined the forum. Ask someone which weighs more an ounce of sugar or an ounce of gold. Usually they say the an ounce is an ounce and they weigh the same. Most all forum members know an ounce of sugar is 28.3 grams (avoir.), but an ounce of gold is 31.1 grams (troy) making the ounce of gold heavier. I then give the person a chance to "redeem" themselves by asking which weighs more, a pound of gold or a pound of sugar. Invariably they say the pound of gold weighs more. Then I explain that a pound of sugar is 454 grams (avoir.) but a pound of gold is only 373.2 grams since a troy pound contains only 12 troy ounces. Really a lot of fun, but noone has ever proven me wrong on this one. I haven't tried this with troy tonnes, but I'm sure the numbers would be easy to look up.


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 28, 2013)

Wow, I guess you can still learn something new every day. I thought the difference ended at the ounce and had never heard of a Troy pound.

This probably has something to do with me never having had enough gold at one time to worry about measuring it in pounds LOL.

P.S. Troy tonnes? Is there such a thing?


----------



## bswartzwelder (Jun 28, 2013)

I'm not sure, but I would think a large scale refiner may have refined several troy tonnes over the course of a year or two. Just a thought


----------



## Wyndham (Jun 29, 2013)

Not a lot to add to this other than I have a titanium electrolytic bath setup with a 12v transformer for coloring titanium. different currents give different colors as it creates an oxidized layer on the TI. It uses tri sodium phosphate in a water bath. the anode and cathode are titanium. This might be where they are coming from fake or not I haven't a clue.
Wyndham


----------



## Traveller11 (Jun 30, 2013)

pgms4me said:


> Geo said:
> 
> 
> > actually, the anode and cathode can be graphite. the oxidizing agent is the sodium hypoclorite - chlorate. as it is electrolysis, the water gets broken down into hydrogen+oxygen while the sodium chloride is decomposed. this is basically the same as HCl/Cl. the problem with this is, it will dissolve almost all the metal present. to get a good clean solution, you would need to remove as many different metal as possible first. in the case of Heap Leaching, the solution is treated with electrolysis and then sprayed onto the heap and then collected and pumped into a collector (electrowinning).
> ...



I like your idea of using a flower pot as a membrane. How would one plug the hole in the bottom of the flower pot? Any types of flower pots you would use in preference to othes?


----------



## bswartzwelder (Jul 1, 2013)

The flower pot idea has been discussed previously. You could plug the hole with a rubber stopper. One thing to make note of: The holes (pores) in the flower pot need to be within a certain size range. If they are larger than 0.5 microns, the gold will pass through. By the same token, they must be larger than 0.005 microns or they wont work.


----------



## Traveller11 (Jul 1, 2013)

bswartzwelder said:


> The flower pot idea has been discussed previously. You could plug the hole with a rubber stopper. One thing to make note of: The holes (pores) in the flower pot need to be within a certain size range. If they are larger than 0.5 microns, the gold will pass through. By the same token, they must be larger than 0.005 microns or they wont work.



Wouldn't I want the gold to pass through and deposit itself in the vicinity of the cathode? I'm trying to separate gold from the sand, black sand and clay it is in.


----------



## Traveller11 (Jul 1, 2013)

bswartzwelder said:


> The flower pot idea has been discussed previously. You could plug the hole with a rubber stopper. One thing to make note of: The holes (pores) in the flower pot need to be within a certain size range. If they are larger than 0.5 microns, the gold will pass through. By the same token, they must be larger than 0.005 microns or they wont work.




Sorry about that. I looked again at the discussion here and on the Chemical Processes board and remembered that we are discussing the Shor system, as well. That one has the semi-permeable membrane between anode and cathode to stop the migration of the chlorine to the cathode. It also has the anode bag to catch the gold slmes at the anode. I was only thnking of how to keep the gold precipitating at the cathode, in the other system, from re-mixing with the ore it came from.


----------



## bswartzwelder (Jul 2, 2013)

With electroplating, we are trying to cause a metal to migrate frome one electrode (usually the anode or positive terminal) and to deposit itself on the other electrode (the cathode or negative terminal). With reverse electroplating, (such as in the Shor Simplicity System) we are essentailly doing the same thing. Except that the gold is now the anode and when power is applied, it will migrate to the cathode. I.E. Instead of plating gold ONTO an object, we are selectively plating it OFF of something. One of the biggest problems with this system was that the gold would plate off the anode and back onto the cathode. Now, we still have essentially the same problem. The gold is no longer on the copper, silver, or other metallic substrate, but firmly plated onto the carbon cathode. I can see where this could be a good thing in that you could put a gold plated carbon electrode into a chemicat solution that would dissolve the gold but not attack the carbon (maybe AR or HCl/Chlorox) of possibly find something that would attack the carbon and leave the gold behind (like AP does with circuit boards). The Shor System tries to keep the gold on the anode side of the membrane and not allow it to pass through to the cathode. However, the electrical power MUST pass through the membrane to complete the circuit.


----------



## Traveller11 (Sep 21, 2013)

bswartzwelder said:


> With electroplating, we are trying to cause a metal to migrate frome one electrode (usually the anode or positive terminal) and to deposit itself on the other electrode (the cathode or negative terminal). With reverse electroplating, (such as in the Shor Simplicity System) we are essentailly doing the same thing. Except that the gold is now the anode and when power is applied, it will migrate to the cathode. I.E. Instead of plating gold ONTO an object, we are selectively plating it OFF of something. One of the biggest problems with this system was that the gold would plate off the anode and back onto the cathode. Now, we still have essentially the same problem. The gold is no longer on the copper, silver, or other metallic substrate, but firmly plated onto the carbon cathode. I can see where this could be a good thing in that you could put a gold plated carbon electrode into a chemicat solution that would dissolve the gold but not attack the carbon (maybe AR or HCl/Chlorox) of possibly find something that would attack the carbon and leave the gold behind (like AP does with circuit boards). The Shor System tries to keep the gold on the anode side of the membrane and not allow it to pass through to the cathode. However, the electrical power MUST pass through the membrane to complete the circuit.



Old thread but I am still having difficulty understanding something here. As you said, in reverse electroplating, the gold chloride migrates to the cathode, where it separates into gold and chloride, with the gold depositing on the cathode in a rather sticky fashion. However, will it always be true that the gold will adhere to the cathode? Read this article on electrolysis from the 1890's, specifically the last sentence of the first paragraph, in which it claims "the gold chloride was decomposed and fell like a shower of fine spangles to the bottom...". This does not sound like they had a problem with gold adhering to the cathode.

http://www.miningandmetallurgy.com/metallurgy/electrolytic-precipitation-gold

If this is true, how many microns in size must the membrane be to allow the passage of gold chloride to the cathode and still prevent ultrafine clay particles from entering the cathode chamber, if one were to use the CETEM salt water electrolytic cell I mentioned earlier in this thread? That design also had the gold depositing at the graphite cathode.


----------



## Fausto (Apr 19, 2014)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTG74ixGSiE


----------



## hatemelborai (Aug 7, 2014)

Geo said:


> just because some one pokes HIS fingers in some proprietary solution without it taking the skin off doesnt mean that its harmless.if i could become a millionaire by exposing my hand to a dangerous chemical a couple of times to make a video, thats the price you pay to be wealthy.



I have contacted this company, for Tin stripper and Au stripper, I have to add nitric acid 1:1 to the solution
the price 10 $/liter
please read the attached file


----------



## butcher (Aug 7, 2014)

Looks like you may be paying 10 dollars a liter for salt water.


----------



## hatemelborai (Aug 18, 2014)

butcher said:


> Looks like you may be paying 10 dollars a liter for salt water.


yes, UW-860 consists of 20 % monohydrate citric acid + 80% water, and you have to add 50% NHO3


----------



## stardust18 (Sep 25, 2014)

hatemelborai said:


> butcher said:
> 
> 
> > Looks like you may be paying 10 dollars a liter for salt water.
> ...



Greetings to all. My two cents into the discussion.
I can understand the use of citric acid, conducted experiments, but not successful.
But the use of nitric acid 50% will result in the dissolution of base metal.


----------



## alexius (Mar 15, 2016)

I have found UW-700, 860 etc. patent US20120292201


----------



## solar_plasma (Mar 15, 2016)

Maybe I am having an overload, just coming from work, but electrolizing NaCl there will develop chlorine at the anode which will dissolve gold. At the cathode we are forming NaOH, which would precipitate gold hydroxide, wouldn't it? This is insoluble and then out of the system. As soon as basemetals are exposed, they will be more willing to dissolve and form hydroxides and complexes depending on the pH.

In the end we can filter off blended hydroxides. Dirty method, just like the tap water silver stripping cell, but it should work more or less. More less, because of the the known limits and disadvantages of most electrolytic stripping approaches.


----------



## Elektrikis (Dec 9, 2016)

I hacked UW700.

https://youtu.be/0kU-VIsk54A


----------



## rickbb (Dec 12, 2016)

Hacked?

How can you "hack" public knowledge? It's citric acid many members here have experimented with it and salt water, etc.


----------



## jeweler1 (Jul 27, 2017)

It's called ContrAul Gold stripper 11 From Advanced Chemicals Providance RI The chemical is Potassium hydroxide
http://advchem.com/products


----------



## goldsilverpro (Jul 28, 2017)

Here are 2 patents for gold strippers from that company. I didn't study them but I think the 1st one is electrolytic and the other is immersion. I also think the 1st one is the issued patent of the patent application posted above by jeweler1.

https://www.google.com/patents/US9090985
https://encrypted.google.com/patents/US9518327

Since I really wasn't interested in them, I haven't totally followed the threads that involved experimenting with these newer strippers. As with all these stripper formulations, they are essentially worthless if you can't figure out how to recover the gold from the stripper.


----------

