Best options for this ash

[kurtak]

So i add a surfactant to keep the gold together? Then run through the mesh sieves in one run after that run I do a clean up and go again?

I will talk about that when I post about working your ash down to a concentrate

Kurt

 

[jord]

I have no idea what a concrete shaker is so could you post a pic of that - as well as a pic of the sluice box you have


Nice size batch

So about half the chips where BGAs ? --- if that is true - with 5kg you are looking at roughly 30 - 40 grams gold (plus/minus)

And for what it is worth there is about (plus/minus) 3 - 4 times more gold in the BGAs then in a "mix" of the other chips

To put that in perspective BGAs run "about" 6 - 8 grams per kilo (depending on mix/type) whereas a "mix" of other chips run about (plus/minus depending on mix) 2 grams per kilo

Keep in mind that when you process chips you will NEVER get 100% of the gold - there is ALWAYS gold lost in every step of the process - the goal in the processing is to minimize the gold lost in the different steps so that most of the gold ends up in the concentrates when you get to the point of leaching or smelting the concentrates --- & you MUST concentrate before leaching or smelting --- why ?


Leaching - that is a LOT ash with a VERY small amount of gold distributed within it - so you need A LOT of leach acid (AR) just to wet that much ash - ALL that wet ash is going to turn to ULTRA fine MUD - it will be IMPOSSIBLE to filter/wash all the leach solution out of all that MUD --- therefore you "must" concentrate to get rid of the ash that creates the mud before leaching - or gold will be lost to leach solution that stays tied up in the mud

Smelting - again - that is a LOT ash with a VERY small amount of gold distributed within it - to slag off that much ash you need "at least" 2X flux (or more) plus collector metal - so - if you have a 15 liter bucket of ash plus two 15 liter buckets of flux = 45 liters - and you still need collector metal - a LOT of collector metal - why ?

To get good collecting of the metal - meaning so that the molten metal is able to rain down through the slag & pool in the bottom of crucible - you need the "smelt load" to be "at least" 30% metal - other wise you will have beads of metal hang up in the slag --- the "less" metal in the smelt load the more beads of metal that hang up in the slag

The smelt load - the smelt load is the combination of the ash + the flux + the collector metal

A bit about the collector metal - for best results in collecting your target metal (the gold bond wires) you want the collector metal to be "small" bits of metal so it can be well mixed in the smelt load so the collector metal makes contact with the target metal

Example; - if you just put you mixed ash/flux in a crucible with some large chunks of copper - bond wires that are close the chunks of copper will collect with the copper when it all gets molten - BUT - bond wires that are not in close contact with the chunks of copper will likely just melt into small beads that hang up in the slag

So you want the copper to be chopped into small bits so it can be well mixed in the smelt load making more of the copper in close contact with the bond wires

So - back to the smelt load - it needs to be (at least) 30% metal to get good collection (pooling in the bottom of the crucible once all molten) that means (roughly) for every 2 cups of ash/flux you need 1 cup chopped copper (the smaller the better)

So trying to smelt 1 bucket ash + 2 buckets flux + 1&1/3 bucket collector metal = 4&1/4 buckets to be smelted - resulting in only 1.5 ozt gold collected in a HUGE amount of copper

So - whether you smelt or leach you MUST get your ash reduced down to a concentrate

With chip ash there is no reason why you can't get a 15 liter bucket of ash reduced down to (plus/minus) a half liter of concentrates for better leaching or smelting

So my next posting will be about reducing that 15 liters down to a workable concentrate for leaching or smelting

Kurt

This is a very detailed post thank you kurt, it will take me a little time to read it all and entirely process what you have shared, I am going to study it. Also the concrete shaker table is just a flat stainless steel table with a small edging with a gap in, with a motor attached underneath will try get photos later for you. But your estimates for this batch sound about correct
*Edited to attach photos*

 

[kurtak]

So i add a surfactant to keep the gold together?

No - the surfactant (such as Jet Dry or dish soap) is used to break the surface tension of the water so that solids (including gold bond wires) sink instead of floating on the surface of the water

Water surface tension is caused by minerals that are naturally dissolved in the water - &/or small amounts of oil (oil floats on water) - surface tension can cause small solid particles (including small gold particles like bond wires) to float on the surface of the water - so a surfactant breaks the surface tension allowing the solids to sink instead of floating

So when you are washing the chip ash away to create your concentrates (such as panning in a gold pan) you want to add "a few" drops of surfactant to the water to break the surface tension so that gold doesn't float & wash out the pan

Though dish soap will work - a product like Jet Dry works better & that is because Jet Dry does not create soap suds (bubbles) like dish soap (if you use to much dish soap) - soap suds (bubbles) can also capture small gold particles causing them to wash away

So you want to look for a product "like" this -------

https://reviewed.usatoday.com/dishwashers/features/what-the-heck-is-rinse-aid-and-why-do-i-need-it

That said - something to be aware of when processing IC chips --- you will NEVER recover 100% of the gold bond bonding wires - or - I should say you will never get ALL the bond wires to end up in your final concentrates

At EVERY step along the way - after you have milled the incinerated chips some gold bond wires get lost

So the goal in the processing steps is to minimize those loses at each step

So the question becomes - do you do a good enough job at each step in the process to be concerned about these loses - or not

Places gold gets lost ------

1) the bond wires are brazed to the Kovar &/or copper legs/leads of the chips & as well brazed to the silicon die inside - so part of the purpose of milling the chips (besides turning the incinerated epoxy to fine powder) is to break the brazed bond wires free from legs/leads & silicon dies & you will "never" get 100% of the bond wires to break free from their brazing --- so "some" gold gets lost when you do the magnetic separation of the Kovar as well as when you sift out the larger copper legs/leads because "some" bond wires remain stuck/brazed to the Kovar/copper --- how much depends on well the chips where milled

2) magnetic separation - you have to spread the ash out very thin (like 1/4 inch & no more then 3/8 inch beep) & run the magnet just above the surface of the ash - not though the ash --- if the ash is to deep &/or you run the magnet "though" the ash - when the magnet pulls the Kovar out of ash the magnet also pulls the Kovar together causing the Kovar to "grip" ahold of "free" bond wires taking those bond wires with it --- so you want the magnet to "lift" the Kovar out of the ash allowing free bond wires to fall back into the ash before the Kovar actually comes together at the magnet that is being passed over & above the ash

3) Over size particles of the (incinerated) epoxy carbon/ash - 80 mesh size particles are not big enough to hold gold bond wires - particles "large" then 80 mesh can & will hold bond wire so "some" bond wires will be stuck in any "over size" that does not go through a 80 mesh screen --- 60 mesh particle of ash/carbon are big enough to hold a gold bond wire & because the particles of ash/carbon are light weight they can & will wash away when panning or washing on a concentrator table

4) Washing the ash away to get your concentrate - there are two things here that cause the loss of gold

1) just flat out being to aggressive with the washing

2) overloading whatever method you choose to do you washing with (pan or concentrator table or blue bowl etc. etc.)

This is where the most gold can (or not) be lost

I meant to get to this today but have run out of time so that will be my next post

I just thought it was worth the time to explain how/where & why "some" gold is ALWAYS lost in the processing of IC chips because those loses can be significant - or not significant enough to be concerned with - all depending on how well you do with each step in the process

And for what it is worth - those loses can be recovered - it is just a question of if they are significant enough to be worth chasing - or not

Kurt

 

[goldshark]

No - the surfactant (such as Jet Dry or dish soap) is used to break the surface tension of the water so that solids (including gold bond wires) sink instead of floating on the surface of the water

Water surface tension is caused by minerals that are naturally dissolved in the water - &/or small amounts of oil (oil floats on water) - surface tension can cause small solid particles (including small gold particles like bond wires) to float on the surface of the water - so a surfactant breaks the surface tension allowing the solids to sink instead of floating

So when you are washing the chip ash away to create your concentrates (such as panning in a gold pan) you want to add "a few" drops of surfactant to the water to break the surface tension so that gold doesn't float & wash out the pan

Though dish soap will work - a product like Jet Dry works better & that is because Jet Dry does not create soap suds (bubbles) like dish soap (if you use to much dish soap) - soap suds (bubbles) can also capture small gold particles causing them to wash away

So you want to look for a product "like" this -------

https://reviewed.usatoday.com/dishwashers/features/what-the-heck-is-rinse-aid-and-why-do-i-need-it

That said - something to be aware of when processing IC chips --- you will NEVER recover 100% of the gold bond bonding wires - or - I should say you will never get ALL the bond wires to end up in your final concentrates

At EVERY step along the way - after you have milled the incinerated chips some gold bond wires get lost

So the goal in the processing steps is to minimize those loses at each step

So the question becomes - do you do a good enough job at each step in the process to be concerned about these loses - or not

Places gold gets lost ------

1) the bond wires are brazed to the Kovar &/or copper legs/leads of the chips & as well brazed to the silicon die inside - so part of the purpose of milling the chips (besides turning the incinerated epoxy to fine powder) is to break the brazed bond wires free from legs/leads & silicon dies & you will "never" get 100% of the bond wires to break free from their brazing --- so "some" gold gets lost when you do the magnetic separation of the Kovar as well as when you sift out the larger copper legs/leads because "some" bond wires remain stuck/brazed to the Kovar/copper --- how much depends on well the chips where milled

2) magnetic separation - you have to spread the ash out very thin (like 1/4 inch & no more then 3/8 inch beep) & run the magnet just above the surface of the ash - not though the ash --- if the ash is to deep &/or you run the magnet "though" the ash - when the magnet pulls the Kovar out of ash the magnet also pulls the Kovar together causing the Kovar to "grip" ahold of "free" bond wires taking those bond wires with it --- so you want the magnet to "lift" the Kovar out of the ash allowing free bond wires to fall back into the ash before the Kovar actually comes together at the magnet that is being passed over & above the ash

3) Over size particles of the (incinerated) epoxy carbon/ash - 80 mesh size particles are not big enough to hold gold bond wires - particles "large" then 80 mesh can & will hold bond wire so "some" bond wires will be stuck in any "over size" that does not go through a 80 mesh screen --- 60 mesh particle of ash/carbon are big enough to hold a gold bond wire & because the particles of ash/carbon are light weight they can & will wash away when panning or washing on a concentrator table

4) Washing the ash away to get your concentrate - there are two things here that cause the loss of gold

1) just flat out being to aggressive with the washing

2) overloading whatever method you choose to do you washing with (pan or concentrator table or blue bowl etc. etc.)

This is where the most gold can (or not) be lost

I meant to get to this today but have run out of time so that will be my next post

I just thought it was worth the time to explain how/where & why "some" gold is ALWAYS lost in the processing of IC chips because those loses can be significant - or not significant enough to be concerned with - all depending on how well you do with each step in the process

And for what it is worth - those loses can be recovered - it is just a question of if they are significant enough to be worth chasing - or not

Kurt

Hi Kurt, so I don't know how familiar you are with the floatation process, so am going to throw this out there. What if a person had the ash, as described in this thread. Fill a 5 gallon bucket with water, distilled preferably, with a paint mixer paddle type, on a drill, were to add the ash while mixing, mainly to wet all the particles. Then add Turpentine. I say Turpentine as it is a known Pine oil distillate, mimicking the Xanthate group of reagents used in the commercial milling of ores ( or so I've been told ), and is very readily available at any hardware store, throughout the world. put an aquarium bubbler in the bottom, agitate with drill, let Au particles float to top, skim float particles to a separate container. Then evaporate water to oily concentrate, enough heat to eventually drive off Turpentine, melt metal in crucible, pour into mold, basically go to refining steps, which are already covered.
In other words, would ash be amenable to the floatation principle, and how to duplicate it in a small refiner setting, with easily contrived means.
Others, please feel free to chime in.

 

[Alondro]

I melted my copper in flat, round anodes. I poured them in a 51/2 inch cast iron skillet that was made especially for baking one cookie per pan at a time. When I poured them I used a wedge under the pan so I would get one side thinner than the other that reduced the amount of copper that fell into the slimes. A copper cell is a great tool to have on hand.

And the nice thing about using copper as a collector: you can MAKE the very fine copper powder you need to really grab the values out of the smelt simply by dropping, washing, and drying the copper from waste solutions! No need to buy powdered copper or waste time grinding a bar!

You can reuse it indefinitely, as every electrolysis run gives you more loaded copper solutions to drop some copper out of. As does processing pins with the AP process. Plenty of sources to get fine copper crystals from your own waste stream!

 

[FrugalRefiner]

And the nice thing about using copper as a collector: you can MAKE the very fine copper powder you need to really grab the values out of the smelt simply by dropping, washing, and drying the copper from waste solutions! No need to buy powdered copper or waste time grinding a bar!

As long as your waste solutions contain only copper, or you can selectively reduce the copper from dirty solutions.

Dave

 

[Tom565]

No - the surfactant (such as Jet Dry or dish soap) is used to break the surface tension of the water so that solids (including gold bond wires) sink instead of floating on the surface of the water

Water surface tension is caused by minerals that are naturally dissolved in the water - &/or small amounts of oil (oil floats on water) - surface tension can cause small solid particles (including small gold particles like bond wires) to float on the surface of the water - so a surfactant breaks the surface tension allowing the solids to sink instead of floating

So when you are washing the chip ash away to create your concentrates (such as panning in a gold pan) you want to add "a few" drops of surfactant to the water to break the surface tension so that gold doesn't float & wash out the pan

Though dish soap will work - a product like Jet Dry works better & that is because Jet Dry does not create soap suds (bubbles) like dish soap (if you use to much dish soap) - soap suds (bubbles) can also capture small gold particles causing them to wash away

So you want to look for a product "like" this -------

https://reviewed.usatoday.com/dishwashers/features/what-the-heck-is-rinse-aid-and-why-do-i-need-it

That said - something to be aware of when processing IC chips --- you will NEVER recover 100% of the gold bond bonding wires - or - I should say you will never get ALL the bond wires to end up in your final concentrates

At EVERY step along the way - after you have milled the incinerated chips some gold bond wires get lost

So the goal in the processing steps is to minimize those loses at each step

So the question becomes - do you do a good enough job at each step in the process to be concerned about these loses - or not

Places gold gets lost ------

1) the bond wires are brazed to the Kovar &/or copper legs/leads of the chips & as well brazed to the silicon die inside - so part of the purpose of milling the chips (besides turning the incinerated epoxy to fine powder) is to break the brazed bond wires free from legs/leads & silicon dies & you will "never" get 100% of the bond wires to break free from their brazing --- so "some" gold gets lost when you do the magnetic separation of the Kovar as well as when you sift out the larger copper legs/leads because "some" bond wires remain stuck/brazed to the Kovar/copper --- how much depends on well the chips where milled

2) magnetic separation - you have to spread the ash out very thin (like 1/4 inch & no more then 3/8 inch beep) & run the magnet just above the surface of the ash - not though the ash --- if the ash is to deep &/or you run the magnet "though" the ash - when the magnet pulls the Kovar out of ash the magnet also pulls the Kovar together causing the Kovar to "grip" ahold of "free" bond wires taking those bond wires with it --- so you want the magnet to "lift" the Kovar out of the ash allowing free bond wires to fall back into the ash before the Kovar actually comes together at the magnet that is being passed over & above the ash

3) Over size particles of the (incinerated) epoxy carbon/ash - 80 mesh size particles are not big enough to hold gold bond wires - particles "large" then 80 mesh can & will hold bond wire so "some" bond wires will be stuck in any "over size" that does not go through a 80 mesh screen --- 60 mesh particle of ash/carbon are big enough to hold a gold bond wire & because the particles of ash/carbon are light weight they can & will wash away when panning or washing on a concentrator table

4) Washing the ash away to get your concentrate - there are two things here that cause the loss of gold

1) just flat out being to aggressive with the washing

2) overloading whatever method you choose to do you washing with (pan or concentrator table or blue bowl etc. etc.)

This is where the most gold can (or not) be lost

I meant to get to this today but have run out of time so that will be my next post

I just thought it was worth the time to explain how/where & why "some" gold is ALWAYS lost in the processing of IC chips because those loses can be significant - or not significant enough to be concerned with - all depending on how well you do with each step in the process

And for what it is worth - those loses can be recovered - it is just a question of if they are significant enough to be worth chasing - or not

Kurt

Thanks for taking the time to type all of this information for us. I'm in the exact same situation as "Jord". I have a question that will also probably benefit him. There are so many options out there for separating gold bonding wires from unwanted material. Unfortunately, most of these are designed for natural gold that comes out of the ground, not almost microscopic bonding wires, which we are after. Does anyone recommend the best method for separating the gold wires from the ash? Concentrator table, blue bowl, sluice box, Miller table, ect.? Basically, which method has the most minimal loss, or are they all about the same?

 

[jord]

Thanks for taking the time to type all of this information for us. I'm in the exact same situation as "Jord". I have a question that will also probably benefit him. There are so many options out there for separating gold bonding wires from unwanted material. Unfortunately, most of these are designed for natural gold that comes out of the ground, not almost microscopic bonding wires, which we are after. Does anyone recommend the best method for separating the gold wires from the ash? Concentrator table, blue bowl, sluice box, Miller table, ect.? Basically, which method has the most minimal loss, or are they all about the same?

I was also wondering if it was possible to seperate them dry some how, because I've always disliked working with the mud it creates. I do not know the exact density of particles so not sure how it could be applied maybe some kind of centrifuge along with gravity? And as you say most applications are to grab gold in the ore form, a gold shaker table is just a no for me in the uk we do not mine gold I believe Kurt has made a post ranking which he deems best to worst in what to use to wash the gold, i think it went ribbed pipe, blue bowl, shaker table and then and actual gold recovery table but I could be getting that wrong.

 

[kurtak]

Hi Kurt, so I don't know how familiar you are with the floatation process,

Hi goldshark

I am familiar with the floatation process but only in what I read/researched about it - including things you have posted

So I am not sure how well it would work for bond wires

My "guess" is that it is going to depend on the size of the bond wires in different chips as different chips have different size bond wires - some chips have ULTRA FINE bond wires (actually microscopic "if" you were to separate out just one wire) - other chips can have quite large bond wires (large enough that you could single out one wire with a tweezer)

Examples; - the bond wires in RAM BGAs ultra fine (microscopic if you could single out just one wire) - on the other hand the bond wires in the black epoxy tops of the N/S bridge BGAs have quite large bond wires - like (plus/minus) 1/2 inch long - so large enough that you could actually single out one wire with a tweezer - & other chips have wires that fall between those to extremes - big enough to see a single wire with the naked eye but not big enough to pick up with tweezer

So I "suspect" floatation would work on the ULTRA fine but not so much on the LARGE & ??? on those between ultra & larger

I happen to have a ice cream bucket full of ash that is load with ULTRA fine wires so may just have to give floatation a try with that bucket of ash when weather warms back up

Kurt

 

[kurtak]

Does anyone recommend the best method for separating the gold wires from the ash? Concentrator table, blue bowl, sluice box, Miller table, ect.? Basically, which method has the most minimal loss, or are they all about the same?

Yes - I do

I believe Kurt has made a post ranking which he deems best to worst in what to use to wash the gold, i think it went ribbed pipe, blue bowl, shaker table and then and actual gold recovery table but I could be getting that wrong.

Here is a link to that post (the "list" is at bottom of post) --------

https://goldrefiningforum.com/threads/ic-chips-gold-recovery.31682/page-3

In fact instead of writing a long post today about washing chip ash I was going to provide a link to this thread as I posted quite a bit of info about washing (to concentrate) in the first 3 pages of this thread

There are a few other things about washing that I will also post about - just not today - so re-read the above for now

Side note --------

shaker table and then and actual gold recovery table

it's the other way around --- concentrator table (good) then shaker table (best)

Here is a link to a post of running ash on my "concentrator" table ----------

https://goldrefiningforum.com/threads/bonding-wires-on-my-concentrator-table.23630/

Here is a link to a video of some of my ash I sent to Jason at Mount Baker Mining & Metals to have them do a test run on my ash on their "shaker" table



Kurt

 

[kurtak]

I was also wondering if it was possible to seperate them dry some how,

I have experimented with a few "dry" methods - none of them worked as well as wet washing

Kurt

 

[nickvc]

Would air separation work … I’m thinking pour the ash slowly from the bucket through an air stream maybe a hairdryer fixed at a distance to only push the ash away while letting the heavier gold drop into another bucket below, I’m no expert on this type of material so I’m open to critique, just trying to find a cheap simple method of separating this material.

 

[kurtak]

In other words, would ash be amenable to the floatation principle,

goldshark --- in the video I provide at about 4:59 minutes it shows bonding wires under magnification which gives an idea on "average" bond wire size - I assume that is 10X magnification

So am interested in what you think as to if floatation is workable - or not

Kurt

 

[kurtak]

Would air separation work … I’m thinking pour the ash slowly from the bucket through an air stream maybe a hairdryer fixed at a distance to only push the ash away while letting the heavier gold drop into another bucket below, I’m no expert on this type of material so I’m open to critique, just trying to find a cheap simple method of separating this material.

I tried that & the bond wire are small enough & light enough that most of them blow away with the ash - the pan that was meant to catch the bond wires ended up with mostly ultra fine (from milling) bits of silicon from the silicon dies ("some" bond wires) but most of the bond wires ended up on the tarp "along with the ash" that the pan meant to catch the bond wires was sitting on

I used a regular window fan set on it's lowest speed which is a lower air speed the a heat gun set on it's lowest speed

My next experiment was to just spread the ash VERY thin on a piece of tin (sheet iron) & just blow on it VERY gently & I could actually watch bond wires being blown away

Though this was not an actual experiment for doing a dry method it goes to show why dry method does not really work

When I am working on a large batch I always do a "test pan" on the ash just to get an idea of gold to ash ratio

So I will put a heaping tablespoon of ash in the pan to see if I just get a few bond wires - or a fair number of bond wires - or an actual little stringer of gold out of that tablespoon of ash

When done with the panning I had a "fair" number of bond wires in the bottom of the pan but not quite an actual stringer of gold --- about that time my dad came out & said he needed me to help with mom

It was a very nice sunny day & there was just a very slight breeze - I had poured the actual water out of the pan but the concentrates were still wet - so I set the pan down on the bench (outside)

When I got back from helping mom the sun/breeze had dried the pan out & ALL the bond wires had been blown away by that very slight breeze

Kurt

 

[kurtak]

And the nice thing about using copper as a collector: you can MAKE the very fine copper powder you need to really grab the values out of the smelt simply by dropping, washing, and drying the copper from waste solutions! No need to buy powdered copper or waste time grinding a bar!

You can reuse it indefinitely, as every electrolysis run gives you more loaded copper solutions to drop some copper out of. As does processing pins with the AP process. Plenty of sources to get fine copper crystals from your own waste stream!

Yes - if smelting - the copper cemented from waste solutions works very well as a collector metal because the FINE copper particles mix in VERY well with the concentrates & flux when making up your "smelt load"

When I was full time refining I did a lot of silver refining so I always had "a lot" of silver cement on hand so I preferred using silver cement as my collector metal

Used both - which one I used just depended on what was being smelted &/or how I intended to deal with the dore metal after smelting

Kurt

 

[goldshark]

Hi goldshark

I am familiar with the floatation process but only in what I read/researched about it - including things you have posted

So I am not sure how well it would work for bond wires

My "guess" is that it is going to depend on the size of the bond wires in different chips as different chips have different size bond wires - some chips have ULTRA FINE bond wires (actually microscopic "if" you were to separate out just one wire) - other chips can have quite large bond wires (large enough that you could single out one wire with a tweezer)

Examples; - the bond wires in RAM BGAs ultra fine (microscopic if you could single out just one wire) - on the other hand the bond wires in the black epoxy tops of the N/S bridge BGAs have quite large bond wires - like (plus/minus) 1/2 inch long - so large enough that you could actually single out one wire with a tweezer - & other chips have wires that fall between those to extremes - big enough to see a single wire with the naked eye but not big enough to pick up with tweezer

So I "suspect" floatation would work on the ULTRA fine but not so much on the LARGE & ??? on those between ultra & larger

I happen to have a ice cream bucket full of ash that is load with ULTRA fine wires so may just have to give floatation a try with that bucket of ash when weather warms back up

Kurt

After watching the video, I would like to comment on some observations;
1. I am wondering if the particles of wire could be separated by screening. The motion of the screen would be imperative, due to the shape of wires. A thin wire would make its way through the screen on end, but if it remained flat, would have less chance if it remained flat, and the length to diameter ratio exceeds 2 (length ) to 1 ( diameter ). So by imparting a horizontal motion only, perhaps concentration of wires could be made. Without experimenting, I have no idea how wires react using floatation, mainly due to a long particle shape.
2. The most effective particle size for floatation is 20 - 150 um. I have not done a particle size analysis on ash, so do not know what the remaining under size will constitute. I will not investigate this, as I will not be refining/recovering this type of material. It would be best suited for study by a lab, which specializes in this type of amendability study, or a competent GRF member.
3. I am wondering if the middling product, or the other heavies in the #1 concentrates, were wires not fully incinerated. They could be wires coated with ?. For floatation to work properly, it would require a clean contact of Au to collector. The collector will not bond to a silica, or carbonaceous coating, necessary for the process to work.

As usual, a small test run of a heaping table spoon would be simple enough.
Classification has always been necessary for the best recovery rate. A screen of closely sized to max Au wire diameter, would give to best screen recovery rate. Perhaps grinding ash to a fine powder (1/2 size of Au wire diameter) would help. Experimentation would be on going, but feel this is a good starting point.

 

[anachronism]

After watching the video, I would like to comment on some observations;
1. I am wondering if the particles of wire could be separated by screening. The motion of the screen would be imperative, due to the shape of wires. A thin wire would make its way through the screen on end, but if it remained flat, would have less chance if it remained flat, and the length to diameter ratio exceeds 2 (length ) to 1 ( diameter ). So by imparting a horizontal motion only, perhaps concentration of wires could be made. Without experimenting, I have no idea how wires react using floatation, mainly due to a long particle shape.
2. The most effective particle size for floatation is 20 - 150 um. I have not done a particle size analysis on ash, so do not know what the remaining under size will constitute. I will not investigate this, as I will not be refining/recovering this type of material. It would be best suited for study by a lab, which specializes in this type of amendability study, or a competent GRF member.
3. I am wondering if the middling product, or the other heavies in the #1 concentrates, were wires not fully incinerated. They could be wires coated with ?. For floatation to work properly, it would require a clean contact of Au to collector. The collector will not bond to a silica, or carbonaceous coating, necessary for the process to work.

As usual, a small test run of a heaping table spoon would be simple enough.
Classification has always been necessary for the best recovery rate. A screen of closely sized to max Au wire diameter, would give to best screen recovery rate. Perhaps grinding ash to a fine powder (1/2 size of Au wire diameter) would help. Experimentation would be on going, but feel this is a good starting point.

The issue with using a screen size close to the diameter of the wire is as you described. The wires are 3D not 2D, and the length causes an issue. It's best to approach it from the opposite way in that the fine ash/dust particles are normally uniform in 3D. Use the screen to take those out instead of taking out the wires. I use triple deck vibratory screens to classify materials in the plant mainly to remove copper strands from shredded plastic heavy material and we always have a fines section that contains both dust and tiny copper granules. This then goes to a second triple deck and further to another process.

You wouldn't need to go as fine as you mentioned, because the vibratory action has the effect of "shrinking" the holes in the mesh. As a note these have a circular motion, and the action of a linear screen is different.

It's also entirely possible that if correctly set up, an air table could sort this .

Edit for spelling.

 

[goldshark]

The issue with using a screen size close to the diameter of the wire is as you described. The wires are 3D not 2D, and the length causes an issue. It's best to approach it from the opposite way in that the fine ash/dust particles are normally uniform in 3D. Use the screen to take those out instead of taking out the wires. I use triple deck vibratory screens to classify materials in the plant mainly to remove copper strands from shredded plastic heavy material and we always have a fines section that contains both dust and tiny copper granules. This then goes to a second triple deck and further to another process.

You wouldn't need to go as fine as you mentioned, because the vibratory action has the effect of "shrinking" the holes in the mesh. As a note these have a circular motion, and the action of a linear screen is different.

It's also entirely possible that if correctly set up, an air table could sort this .

Edit for spelling.

Just so we are on the same page, the reason for the screen size, and particular side to side motion, is to keep the wires on the screen. This will let the ash, and other undersize PMs fall through, for other recovery techniques, like possibly floatation. I am using this as an example, for small time refiners, using a minimal amount of equipment, to clean up a 5 gallon bucket of ash or so.
How do you process your material on the large scale you work at, after classifying?

 

[anachronism]

Just so we are on the same page, the reason for the screen size, and particular side to side motion, is to keep the wires on the screen. This will let the ash, and other undersize PMs fall through, for other recovery techniques, like possibly floatation. I am using this as an example, for small time refiners, using a minimal amount of equipment, to clean up a 5 gallon bucket of ash or so.
How do you process your material on the large scale you work at, after classifying?

It depends on the type of product mix once classified. The smallest material goes for density separation to lift the lights out which are normally plastic and the larger material goes for optical sorting.

 

[andu]

Wouldn't you reduce the volume quite a bit if you used water to dissolve the white ash then be left with gold and carbon alone? You would need a pretty good filter and the amount of time it takes won't be small but I find it doable.

Also, any reason one wouldn't make a complete cover/seal on say copper electrolysis cells to avoid evaporation?