Hope this prompts some comments from our leading lights.....I have been told that some one purchased the refining kit from JM for wet refining and couldn't achieve better than 99.7 per cent return...my thoughts are this is been run by people who don't fully understand the processes and where apparent losses aren't fully understood and the reclamation of losses is been handled badly. We all know that 100 per cent isn't possible from one pass through the system but the loss of 3 grams per kilo seems excessive....something doesn't add up..over heating solutions,no stock pot,no reclaim from pots and fluxes,accumulated values in the extraction and scubbing system,bad assaying? Any thoughts on this would be welcomed.
Losses in the AR process......
- Thread starter nickvc
- Start date
Help Support Gold Refining Forum:
By JM are you referring to Johnson Matthey? I did not know they had a kit, do you have a link?
I agree those losses seem high, especially if it is from a professional set-up. Did you see the post by Harold were he coated the side of his RV with colloidal gold while evaporating nitric? That is a lesson that will stick with you!
I agree those losses seem high, especially if it is from a professional set-up. Did you see the post by Harold were he coated the side of his RV with colloidal gold while evaporating nitric? That is a lesson that will stick with you!
Barren Realms 007
In Remembrance
I am using too large of a vessel to wash in and it causes loss problems. However I contain those losses by letting material settle and recover them from solutions.
I make sure that I use a copper slab to cement any possible values that might have been lost. I test every thing almost to make sure I am not leaving nothing.
I can deffinetly see with the way my material to process has evolved that processing larger lots there is definetly the chance to curtail your losses to a greater extent if you take your time and follow procedures as outlined here on the forum.
Melting smaller buttons can have a tendency to create more losses as well because there is more of a chance for your material to get cought up in the flux. But larger buttons allow you to reclaim this material.
There are chances for losses in the whole stream of processing, it is just a matter of how much attention is spent to detail and how much paitence one has.
I make sure that I use a copper slab to cement any possible values that might have been lost. I test every thing almost to make sure I am not leaving nothing.
I can deffinetly see with the way my material to process has evolved that processing larger lots there is definetly the chance to curtail your losses to a greater extent if you take your time and follow procedures as outlined here on the forum.
Melting smaller buttons can have a tendency to create more losses as well because there is more of a chance for your material to get cought up in the flux. But larger buttons allow you to reclaim this material.
There are chances for losses in the whole stream of processing, it is just a matter of how much attention is spent to detail and how much paitence one has.
In a straight aqua regia refining environment with manual filtration, good scrubbed exhaust, and all of the normal handling inadequacies of a manual system, I rarely see less than 99.875, or 1/8th of 1 percent. This gold is not lost but it is hung up in slags, ductwork, treatment sludges, spent solutions, and never overlook the silver chloride bars. Usually by adding back the gold in the silver chloride bar, the short term lot accountability exceeds 99.9.
Another consideration is the starting assays, are the bars assayed and if so what are the spreads.
I would also like to see some data on the kits from JM you speak of. I didn't think they were in that end of the business.
Another consideration is the starting assays, are the bars assayed and if so what are the spreads.
I would also like to see some data on the kits from JM you speak of. I didn't think they were in that end of the business.
jimdoc
Well-known member
Johnson Matthey owns Alfa Aesar,and I have seen some refining items in their catalog.I have seen Smopex and similar items,maybe that is where you would find such a kit,if they have one.I doubt they would sell a kit like Shor,or one with acids for basic refining,probably just higher end expensive items.
Jim
Jim
Sorry didn't explain the kit part properly, it was what JM were using themselves to refine, what they refined through it I don't know but will try to find out, the people who purchased it were using it to refine carat scrap bars but again don't have much detail but was thinking I wouldn't mind having a look at their wastes :lol:
4metals I'm pleased you posted as I thought you would have a handle on this. I asked the fella who told me about this about the assays and was told they were Sheffield Assay Office assayed bars and he reckons that he treated the silver chloride residues and that the reaction vessels had condensers fitted to them! I have asked for photos of exactly what they were using to see if I can spot any possible areas that they missed but Im beginning to think that the operators were less than skill full and the losses may be due to inexperience and bad procedures rather than the equipment itself. Examination of the used fluxes and pots is one area that may be worth trying also I'm not to sure they dropped all the gold out of the solutions, I can almost be sure that no assays or proper testing was done on the waste solutions. He is still adamant that he only got 99.7 percent recovery even after treating the waste , something doesn't add up!
Back in the late '70's I knew of a guy who was refining for a rather large collector, who was his only account. He knew how to refine but he never assayed the bars, he just trusted the assays he was given. He never completely caught up between his out-turn and his incoming metal so he never knew his actual position.
Fast forward about 6 months and the refiner caught up with his production only to find he was about 150 ounces off, below the expected assay quantities. Turns out the collector never corrected his assays to allow for silver retention and his assays were all a bit high. Of course he never admitted that, but the numbers worked out to be about 0.17% of the total gold refined. If one performs a proper correction on every furnace run, the actual corrections come out very close to that 0.17% on average.
If there is a moral to this story it is a good successful refiner will never settle on numbers that he was told, only on numbers he can verify. Your story implies he was told by the materials owner that the scrap was assayed by the Sheffield assay office, was it a corrected fire assay? Did he verify the assay? Was the material sampled before processing by your friend or did he simply rely on the "Sheffield" reputation? Usually large high grade lots are settled on assay not out-turn. Also what was the fire assay result for gold on the silver chloride bar?
Fast forward about 6 months and the refiner caught up with his production only to find he was about 150 ounces off, below the expected assay quantities. Turns out the collector never corrected his assays to allow for silver retention and his assays were all a bit high. Of course he never admitted that, but the numbers worked out to be about 0.17% of the total gold refined. If one performs a proper correction on every furnace run, the actual corrections come out very close to that 0.17% on average.
If there is a moral to this story it is a good successful refiner will never settle on numbers that he was told, only on numbers he can verify. Your story implies he was told by the materials owner that the scrap was assayed by the Sheffield assay office, was it a corrected fire assay? Did he verify the assay? Was the material sampled before processing by your friend or did he simply rely on the "Sheffield" reputation? Usually large high grade lots are settled on assay not out-turn. Also what was the fire assay result for gold on the silver chloride bar?
HAuCl4
Well-known member
4metals said:
Good accounting is 99.95% of the battle in the PM business!. 8)
