Lost Password :: Posting Pictures :: Who's Online :: Stats :: Memberlist :: Top Posters :: Search
Alaska Gold Forum :: Alaska Prospecting Forum :: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table
Unsubscribe From Newsletter

Welcome, Register :: Log In Welcome to our newest member, Salchackettpr.

people online in the last 1 minutes - 0 members, 0 anon and 0 guests. (Most ever was 44 at 17:01:08 Tue Nov 20 2012)

Pages: [ 1 2 3 ]

[ Notify of replies made to this post ][ Print ][ Send To Friend ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ > ]

geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 13:21:33 FriAug 25 2017 )

Conclusion;

Falcon developed the Gravity Gold Concentration technology as we know it in the form of a centrifuge with internal bowl. They are transparent about the system, own the patents.

http://seprosystems.com/products/gravity-concentrators/_falcon-c-gravity-concentrators/

Falcon went through a merger and is now Sepro Systems.

iCON has a low cost "Knock-off" made in China and marketed by at least a dozen companies. I leave it to the reader to decide on the virtues of the iCON. My BS meter pegged out on this one for a number of reasons.

- Geowizard
[1 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 13:22:55 Fri Aug 25 2017]

  
911Metallurgy
Offline
48 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 16:23:49 FriAug 25 2017 )

I guess the dozens and dozens of Master Thesis and PhD degrees research done over the last 20 years were all wrong and were misguided. 100s of research papers; all worthless.

Knelson Concentrators
and
Falcon Concentrators

  
911Metallurgy
Offline
48 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 16:30:24 FriAug 25 2017 )

iCon - a knock off?

this must be why Falcon/Sepro links to the iCon website http://www.concentrators.net/ and it must be the reason why it refers back to Sepro http://www.iconcentrator.com/icon-gold-recovery-contact-us

:thinking:



---
Mineral Processing Forum
 
 
popandsonminers
Offline
447 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 16:46:27 FriAug 25 2017 )

Hi guys,

This thread is quite interesting for the student of fine gold recovery- thanks Wis49er and all contributors. With due respect to Dave McCracken and his definition of “flour gold” as <40 mesh, actual flour for bread-baking is around 200 mesh. So, I agree with David’s (911 Metallurgy) definition of flour gold and the performance of the iCon here:

https://www.911metallurgist.com/blog/flour-gold-recovery

With a top feed size of 2mm, the iCon can recover gold much smaller than 100 mesh, contrary to the Ratio of Masses computations, which I am not familiar with. Maybe it applies to settling velocity, which is quite different that the dynamics going on in an iCon. I also believe that the Neffco bowl can recover a high percentage of 200 mesh gold. Heck, you can recover 200 mesh gold with a piece of expanded metal over miner’s moss in a simple sluice.

There are a number of products that recover “fine”, “flour” or “micron” gold, so which is “better”? It’s often personal preference, but a high gravitational force in a spinning bowl (there are many available) is not required, nor necessarily better. We manufacture a simple shaker table that is remarkable at recovering very fine gold from hard rock ore, placer cons and gold from pulverized printed circuit boards. It relies on only 1x gravity to settle the gold down into the grooves on the table, produces a hi-grade meltable gold concentrate and is continuous, so never needs a “clean out”. At 2,000lbs/hr of quartz ore slurry, the table recovers a high percentage of the >325 mesh gold, as well as a significant amount of gold at 400 mesh. Starting at 5:15 in this video, you can see the sieve fractions we separated from gold off the table:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlAXVFFFiEI&t=188s

There is also continuous hi-grade concentration of the (potentially) gold bearing sulfides for later sale to a refiner.

David- can you list refiners/smelters/traders that offer the payment schedule you outlined above, for 3 oz/ton gold/sulfide concentrates? Does anyone else have favorite buyers for sulfides?

One point to consider with any fine gold recovery device is that it must be operated properly! Some have many moving parts or are a bit temperamental. The best way to get an unbiased opinion is to talk to owners that use the machine you are considering. Miners are not usually shy with their opinions! The best way to know if the machine is suitable for you is to try out your own material on the machine you’re considering- test, test, and only then buy.

Jim, thanks for maintaining the best gold forum on the internet.

Steve Gaber
Mt Baker Mining and Metals, LLC
www.MBMMLLC.com

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 19:13:32 FriAug 25 2017 )

David,

Falcon is recognized in my post above.

The Falcon Technology is well proven, patented and continues to serve the mining industry under Sepro Systems.

iCON is where it gets FUZZY.

iCON cannot use Falcon/ Sepro Systems recovery technology without a license. So, iCON is not transparent in representation of their product. Who are the Falcon Engineers? etc. Why are marketing images mostly from third world countries?

- Geowizard

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 19:22:24 FriAug 25 2017 )

Steve,

The process of panning and any other Gravity recovery method is based on the MASS of GOLD relative to all other lighter materials.

The ratio of the mass of sand and GOLD is fundamental.

The mass of the GOLD must be GREATER than the other particles in the recovery system or it cannot be recovered. The smaller GOLD washes overboard with the unscreened (larger mass) particles.

We know that to be true. That's why we SCREEN the material to recover GOLD!

Thanks!

-Geowizard
[1 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 21:02:13 Fri Aug 25 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 20:05:12 FriAug 25 2017 )

David,

I have seen many "secret", "black box" recovery systems. There aren't any secrets. It's like selling snake oil.

I have spent a lot of time discussing the physics of Gravity as it relates to GOLD recovery above and on related threads on this Forum. The fundamental physics doesn't require proof. We see it working around us every day.

- Geowizard
[3 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 23:47:06 Sat Aug 26 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 20:28:41 FriAug 25 2017 )

Steve,

There are only a few smelters remaining in the Continental US.

1. The Sunshine smelter in (Kellog) Idaho.

2. ARC Heights smelter near Dateland, Arizona.

3. Silvertowne Mint, Wichester, Indiana

4. Elemetal has offices all over the west and Alaska.

There are smelters at Miami, Arizona - Freeport McMoran and ASARCO/ Grupo Mexico near Kearney, Arizona - they don't run outside material.

There is a short list of refiners like Oxford, but they don't take mine-run cons or "dirty" cons.

Environmental controls have tightened to the point, that smelters are becoming a thing of the past.

- Geowizard

[1 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 20:30:51 Fri Aug 25 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 20:44:45 FriAug 25 2017 )

Reading the "Fine print";

David,

I noticed on your post of August 21, (09-47-34) that you specify the FEED at 200 MESH for ultra fine GOLD recovery.

"Target 200 mesh grind into the iCon to get all the possible GRG gravity recoverable gold."

- Geowizard
[2 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 20:47:50 Fri Aug 25 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 20:59:24 FriAug 25 2017 )

David,

It makes sense to screen down to 200 mesh.

Have you tried to screen two tons of feed to 200 mesh?

- Geowizard

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 21:59:37 FriAug 25 2017 )

Steve,

I went to your website. www.MBMMLLC.com

Excellent website! :smile:

- Geowizard


  
Jim_Alaska
Offline
4662 posts
Admin

Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 00:58:11 SatAug 26 2017 )

In response to my friend Steve Gaber I want to say thank you for your contributions to this board over the years.

This is a great thread and typical of the kind of information that has made this one of the best mining message boards on the net.

Our board is unique in that along with just normal mining talk, there is a tremendous amount of very technical information that has been posted over the years.

I want to thank every member that has contributed and especially those who have technical knowledge far above the every day miner. Thank you for your willingness to share that knowledge.



---
Jim_Alaska
Administrator
jfoley@sisqtel.net
 
 
911Metallurgy
Offline
48 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 04:58:20 SatAug 26 2017 )

GW,
can you not understand that iCon & Falcon are just Brands of Seprosystem?

WATCH THIS!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8voGKWx79w
[3 edits; Last edit by 911Metallurgy at 12:43:09 Sat Aug 26 2017]



---
Gold Mining Equipment
 
 
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 13:04:47 SatAug 26 2017 )

Everyone,

After watching the Sales PITCH in the previous post,

WATCH THIS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SS0zrEGIcC0

Artisinal miners? :smile:

- Geowizard
[3 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 13:09:19 Sat Aug 26 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 15:02:23 SatAug 26 2017 )


The problem GOLD miners have is the PITCHMEN that want to MINE THE MINERS.

A smart miner - and it doesn't take LONG to get SMART, asks questions and goes through a process of analyzing the plethora of "Products and Services" that come from every direction seeking to separate him/her from his/her HARD EARNED MONEY. :smile:

Asking questions and getting intelligent replies MUST be part of the process.

When a PITCHMAN comes knockin... and then...gets flustered after serious discussion on the salient features of a product or service - RED FLAGS pop up!

The PITCH represents an opportunity for the PITCHMAN to make an introduction to a product or service.

IS IT FUZZY?

Yeppers...!

The introduction to the product must be CLEAR - NOT FUZZY.

Illustration;

Presentation Graphics CAN SELL a product. In the case of the iCON, the graphic has ARROWS that purport to illustrate the "OPERATING DETAILS". The ARROWS for some reason, illustrate a tailing dump from nowhere to nowhere and inlet flow that is bi-directional.

IS IT FUZZY?

- Geowizard
[1 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 23:50:20 Sat Aug 26 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 15:23:37 SatAug 26 2017 )

Save the WORLD;

Ok...I'm ready for the PITCH... LOOK! it doesn't use MERCURY.

Really? :smile:

I'm HAPPY now!

The Natives in AFRICA WILL use MERCURY to do the finishing of the cons that are recovered by the iCON.

However, there's a SMALL problem;

Notice in the VIDEO PITCH above, the SETTING in which the Native population of ARTISINAL miners in AFRICA operate...

The UTILITY system is so advanced, you CANNOT SEE IT.

I'm not an expert. I don't play one on TV.

- Geowizard
[2 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 14:27:03 Sun Aug 27 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 16:49:20 SatAug 26 2017 )

Save the WORLD Part 2;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGtZaE3QvIU

Pay attention to the end of the video and HOW they recover the ONE GRAM of GOLD that "Came from the shaker table"..

Yep... Saving the WORLD.

- Geowizard

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 14:45:36 SunAug 27 2017 )

Reality;

The process of Gravity concentration (separation) of GOLD is very basic.

Gold or any HIGH mass particle can be separated from other particles having LESS mass.

A Wave Table;

Wave Tables are another form of Gravity Concentration. The force of Gravity keeps GOLD and other heavy, HIGHER MASS particles segregated (separated) from the lighter particles having LESS MASS.

Wave Tables are used to separate sulfides from limestone and many other combinations of particles that have DIFFERENT MASS.

The challenge comes when the MASS of the desired particles gets close to the MASS of the undesired particles.

Running GOLD and Quartz on a Wave Table is interesting but... It represents the BEST POSSIBLE scenario.

Reality;

In REALITY, the WORLD contains an abundance of other HEAVY, HIGHER MASS minerals and metals.

SCREENING is always recommended but not often part of the discussion. The HIGHEST MASS particle DEFINES the LOWEST MASS Particle that can be recovered in ALL cases.

- Geowizard

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 18:02:00 SunAug 27 2017 )

What happens in a BOWL?

GIVEN:

A Bowl in a Centrifuge;

The ACCELERATION of ALL of the particles is the SAME.

The MASSES are DIFFERENT.

THE FORCE is directly proportional to the MASS.

HEAVY particles experience GREATER FORCE.

LIGHTER, LOWER MASS particles flow into the bowl and because there is LESS FORCE, they flow out to an exit on continuous flow or to a discharge hopper in batch mode. The Heavy (HIGH MASS) particles are FORCED against the side of the Bowl.

There are different designs of Bowls. The Falcon Video discusses the Models they offer and the operation of the Bowls.

- Geowizard

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 18:19:47 SunAug 27 2017 )

Reality of the Bowl;

The concentrate recovered from the Bowl is composed of ALL of the HEAVIES including GOLD.

Now what?

The CONS from the Bowl go to a "TABLE".

The concentrate is NOT quartz and GOLD. The concentrate is composed of ALL of the HEAVY HIGH MASS particles.

A Wave Table has to be ran VERY SLOW to separate HEAVIES from other HEAVIES. The flow of water across the table and the acceleration of the particles on the table are critical.

OPTION B:

Bag it and tag it. Send it off DIRTY to a SMELTER.

IF the BOWL is installed in the latter stages of the circuit to concentrate a concentrate composed of heavies, the Range of Masses has already been narrowed down to all of the most DENSE, HIGHEST MASS particles to be recovered.

CASSITERITE has a MASS of 7.0 and a MASS of 6.0 in water.

GOLD has a MASS of 18.3 in water. Gold has x 3 the MASS of Cassiterite.

IF you have screened HEAVIES containing CASSITERITE, at 2mm (2000 microns) going into the BOWL, the smallest GOLD that can be recovered is 2000 / 3 = 667 micron.

The PHYSICAL FACT is that 667 micron GOLD has the SAME MASS as 2000 micron Cassiterite. As the system eliminates the cassiterite, the 667 microns, GOLD goes out with it.

- Geowizard
[1 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 18:56:22 Sun Aug 27 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 19:25:40 SunAug 27 2017 )

JAW CRUSHER;

The 2mm specification for the iCON feed seems harmless. But...

A requirement for 2mm "maximum" feed attaches the requirement for additional equipment. A Jaw Crusher with feed conveyor is needed to feed the Jaw crusher. That is combined with a conveyor to a 2mm screen with a third conveyor to move oversize from the screen back to the jaw crusher. A fourth conveyor transports the 2mm minus to the iCON.

From the prior post, we can see that if the feed is composed of cassiterite, the SMALLEST GOLD recovered will be 670 micron.

It was suggested that the FEED to the iCON be SCREENED down to 200 mesh to satisfy the "FINE GOLD part of the PITCH.

BALL MILL OR ROD MILL?

Your choice. Adding a MILL to the proposition makes the COST of "CONDITIONING" the feed go through the roof. The MILL requires RODS or BALLS, MOTOR, Electric power and a maintenance program.

The MILL requires a return circuit composed of a 200 mesh screen and a (fifth) OS return conveyor. A sixth conveyor feeds 200 mesh to a slurry tank.

From the above VIDEO, it can be seen that slurry pumps and slurry tank become part of the circuit. The slurry will settle out if it is not kept in suspension. The external slurry pump and tank keep things moving when the iCON operates in BATCH mode. Rinsing the iCON has to be done WITHOUT stopping the rest of the circuit.

- Geowizard
[1 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 20:20:10 Sun Aug 27 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 01:37:47 MonAug 28 2017 )

Commercial placer GOLD operation;

The Falcon SB will handle 400 Tons per hour. It will upgrade (concentrate) by a factor of x10,000.

http://seprosystems.com/products/gravity-concentrators/_falcon-sb-gravity-concentrators/

A Placer operation flow sheet is given. A scrubber and dual screen is suggested. The dual screen has a 10 mm screen over a 2 mm screen. The over size goes out to the oversize tailings, The 2 mm to 10 mm reports to the sluice and the 2 mm minus reports to the Falcon Bowl. Falcon Bowl cons report to a wave table.

That takes care of business! :smile:

- Geowizard
[1 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 01:39:13 Mon Aug 28 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 13:41:24 WedAug 30 2017 )

Conditioning the FEED;

When a PLACER GOLD mining operation is considered, the MINER studies the needed equipment to recover the GOLD from the FEED.

The FEED can be a variable that runs the full range of possibilities from large ROCKS to uniform Beach sand.

Conditioning includes SCREENING whether a miner uses a Centrifugal Concentrator or a Sluice Box. Justification for using Centrifugal Concentration based on SAMPLING and sending a SAMPLE to a Metallurgical Lab has been suggested in earlier posts above. Metallurgical Labs have the convenience of TIME and ACCESS to LAB equipment like crushers, mills and shaker screens. All of that makes the process of "Conditioning" LOOK SIMPLE.

MINING in the real world is done outside of the laboratory. For most mining operations, COST is a factor and LOGISTICS is a factor.

- Geowizard

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 15:57:09 WedAug 30 2017 )

Treating the CONS;

Centrifugal Concentrators produce a concentrate that requires further treatment. One of the papers on the FALCON concentrators site (Sepro Mining Systems) points out that the Concentrate may be too fine to run over a wave table.

Using David's Google search on the Knelson Bowl, I found this report;

www.gekkos.com/sites/default/files/documents/TechnicalPaper005TheInLineLeachReactorTheNewArtInIntensiveCyanidation.pdf

Treating the cons may often require CYANIDE LEACH. The process has other recovery methods including Electrowinning to obtain GOLD.

- Geowizard

  
911Metallurgy
Offline
48 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 16:19:45 WedAug 30 2017 )

Concentrate may be too fine to run over a wave table.

= because a iCon/Falcon can recover fine gold a table will just loose.

[1 edits; Last edit by 911Metallurgy at 16:20:00 Wed Aug 30 2017]

  
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 16:51:32 WedAug 30 2017 )

Paper 7;

Paper 7 serves as a good reference (Figure 2) to flow charts that depict wave tables..

http://seprosystems.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/laplante.pdf

Other flow sheets reflect the degree of post processing of Falcon Bowl concentrates using Cyanide.

Centrifugal Concentration can be used to recover values before going to a wave table or in some cases, it can scavenge fines that pass over the wave table.

The Centrifugal concentrator produces a concentrate that requires further processing. The degree of down stream processing and the cost of that processing must be a consideration.

There is a point of diminishing return. :smile:

- Geowizard
[3 edits; Last edit by geowizard at 12:36:21 Thu Aug 31 2017]

  
911Metallurgy
Offline
48 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 00:21:31 WedSep 6 2017 )

you might enjoy Understanding the Gold Centrifuge by Comparing it with a Sluice Box

[1 edits; Last edit by 911Metallurgy at 00:22:18 Wed Sep 6 2017]



---
Gold Mining Equipment
 
 
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 18:53:39 FriSep 8 2017 )

To summarize,

Gravity as we know it is an "acceleration",

The "Force" of gravity is equal to mass x acceleration.

All matter has mass and the separation of matter using the force of gravity is related to the mass of the matter.

A sluice, centrifuge and a wave table ALL operate using the fundamental Force of Gravity.

Do a cost - performance analysis - A sluice box wins.

The sluice box has been proven to recover fine gold - down to micron GOLD. It takes patience.

- Geowizard

  
911Metallurgy
Offline
48 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 23:11:04 FriSep 8 2017 )

patience does not change the laws of physics.




---
Gold Highbanker Sluice
 
 
geowizard
Offline
1526 posts
Reply
Re: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table ( 15:32:30 SatSep 9 2017 )

911,

Physics as related to micron GOLD requires patience.

At 2 tons per hour - that's like molasses!

And several passes... That's three times slower than molasses! :smile:

- Geowizard

  

Pages: [ 1 2 3 ]

[ Notify of replies made to this post ][ Print ][ Send To Friend ] [ Watch ] [ < ] [ > ]

 Total Members: 11932

  • Can't start a new thread. (Everyone Registered)
  • Can't start a new poll. (Mods & Admins)
  • Can't add a reply. (Everyone Registered)
  • Can't edit your posts.(Everyone Registered)
  • Register :: Log In :: Administrators

    The time is now 08:57:44 Sat Dec 16 2017

    Powered By BbBoard V1.4.2
    © 2001-2007 BbBoy.net
    Alaska Gold Forum :: Alaska Prospecting Forum :: Gravity concentrator versus Wave table

    [Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

    [Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]