Barren Realms 007
In Remembrance
Interesting setup Kevin. Don't forget to put your wash waters in your stock pot.
SMD capacitors and resistors yield
- Thread starter kjavanb123
- Start date
Help Support Gold Refining Forum:
kjavanb123
Well-known member
Barren,
Indeed saving everything that tests positive for Palladium get saved. Today I managed to refine part of red powder produced before, into a button. Here are some pic show.
The red powder prior adding cold concentrated ammonia solution,
After lots of stirring, there was a pinkish sludge at the bottom, which I believe is iron contamination, and a blue solution which hints copper or nickel contamination. Added muratic acid, few drops and the yellow powder appeared,
And upon addition of hcl to it,
Calcining the yellow powder on medium heat, note the smoke is white,
The gray/black powder weighed 22.750 grams, once melted the button weighed 16.470 grams,
I believe there is another troy ounce of Pd remained in solution which shall be recovered later.
Thanks
Kj
Indeed saving everything that tests positive for Palladium get saved. Today I managed to refine part of red powder produced before, into a button. Here are some pic show.
The red powder prior adding cold concentrated ammonia solution,
After lots of stirring, there was a pinkish sludge at the bottom, which I believe is iron contamination, and a blue solution which hints copper or nickel contamination. Added muratic acid, few drops and the yellow powder appeared,
And upon addition of hcl to it,
Calcining the yellow powder on medium heat, note the smoke is white,
The gray/black powder weighed 22.750 grams, once melted the button weighed 16.470 grams,
I believe there is another troy ounce of Pd remained in solution which shall be recovered later.
Thanks
Kj
A
Anonymous
Guest
Did I miss your answer to my posts about getting a true refined weight of gold from your processes Kevin?
spaceships said:
I believe Kevin has made some valuable contributions to the forum that were based on hard work and perseverance. The processes, novel in some cases, were presented in a clear and concise manner clearly detailing all procedures. The final numbers should be respectfully considered a trade secret and should not be pursued on the open forum. Those final numbers were earned by Kevin and they belong to him ..alone. I would strongly discourage it, but if he volunteer those final numbers, I am sure we would be thankful. However, repeatedly demanding what should now be proprietary to Kevin is definitely threading into the realms of disrespect.
Respectfully.
Yours truly.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Aristo I don't agree.
Allow me to be reasoned about this if I may.
It's one thing to suggest that we're dealing with proprietary processes and suggest that information should be kept secret. I get that. However in that case figures should not be given at all. I would understand that.
However to make claims about the yields that are patently based upon inaccurate data that people can then read and make assumptions on is a completely different matter. It's been said many a time that inaccuracies are something that people should not post, in order to prevent people making mistakes in their learning. So I would respectfully suggest that one ethos or the other should be applied.
It's been said on a number of occasions that we are meant to be men of science. Whether I agree or disagree is not pertinent, however I would suggest that people should follow this approach when delivering figures that people are meant to take as fact.
You think this is wrong?
I'm sorry but I don't think it's disrespectful in this context to ask for clarity.
Jon
Allow me to be reasoned about this if I may.
It's one thing to suggest that we're dealing with proprietary processes and suggest that information should be kept secret. I get that. However in that case figures should not be given at all. I would understand that.
However to make claims about the yields that are patently based upon inaccurate data that people can then read and make assumptions on is a completely different matter. It's been said many a time that inaccuracies are something that people should not post, in order to prevent people making mistakes in their learning. So I would respectfully suggest that one ethos or the other should be applied.
It's been said on a number of occasions that we are meant to be men of science. Whether I agree or disagree is not pertinent, however I would suggest that people should follow this approach when delivering figures that people are meant to take as fact.
You think this is wrong?
I'm sorry but I don't think it's disrespectful in this context to ask for clarity.
Jon
kjavanb123
Well-known member
Spaceships,
Sory was away from the forum so I havent had the chance to reply to my posts, but I did not purify the gold I recovered in my posts, I will however get them assayed in my next batch of 500kg motherboqrds next week, so you will know the result.
Thanks all for your comments.
Regards
Kj
Sory was away from the forum so I havent had the chance to reply to my posts, but I did not purify the gold I recovered in my posts, I will however get them assayed in my next batch of 500kg motherboqrds next week, so you will know the result.
Thanks all for your comments.
Regards
Kj
