CANADIAN GOLD PROSPECTING FORUM - Gold Prospecting Forums

Gold Prospecting Forums - General => General Gold Prospecting Forum => Topic started by: The Fossicker on January 01, 2010, 08:36:39 PM

Title: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 01, 2010, 08:36:39 PM
Howdy All,
I thought I would pass along my latest kick in gold prospecting - looking for micro flood gold in rivers. What I mean by "micro" would be 100 - 200 mesh. Generally when I'm looking for the little stuff I look for fall out areas where black sand layers on the surface or deeper seems to be the place of choice for what I'm after. Lately though I have been coming upon sand and gravel bars that have built up to 6 feet or better in height near the mouth of some rivers. These bars are usually covered by small rounded cobble on top and almost pure sand below with very little black Sand at all. Cross cutting a trough through these mounds shows large amounts of micro gold in the first inch or so, then nothing. I'm still not sure why this is happening only on the top portion, but it is acting just like standard flood gold which in most places I've been does not penetrate deeper than 6 inches. Wheather I figure it out or not, I'm having fun getting the little stuff and it's starting to add up one grain at a time! How about let's hearing from others who have some experience chasing small micro gold and trying to find where it likes to hide. Any tips??

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: J-Bear on January 01, 2010, 10:20:48 PM
Hello Fossicker
What equipment would you use to recover micro fine gold?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 01, 2010, 10:51:36 PM
Thats exactly what I have chosen to focus on....for now
Micro Fine Gold.
I have been working the silts of the Lower Fraser River....I'm pretty sure it's probably more like -300 to -400 mesh.
I know it is there.... but to recover it is no easy feat...there is black sand as well.... but it too is micro sized  ^#!
The time and gas I save in driving to the Fraser Canyon...well .... I hope to offset it with the time spent on the micro gold recovery...we will see  [^Crazy!#]
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 01, 2010, 11:48:57 PM
That is great news finch68....I'd love to follow you along on this journey....I was looking for an article describing the flow rates of water at the Mission Bridge river flood guage....

It runs somewhere around 14,000 cubic metres per second   running through there on the spring Freshet....with that volume of water and force I just believe the fine gold has no chance to settle out too quickly, and it is probably scouring out the Fraser Canyon of any fine gold....only to be carried for miles down stream with thousands of yards of silt....well thats what I'm betting on...we will see  <-good_>
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 02, 2010, 12:29:39 AM
I know what you are referring to.... I had that site Bookmarked...a couple of years ago we were asked to get ready to evacuate Fort Langley....so I would be watching the levels several times per day...even drove to the river morning and evening to watch the water rise....scarry stuff I have to say  <~ShOcK~>
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Blister on January 02, 2010, 12:34:21 AM
 I don't know much about miller tables. only what I've read on here. Could you classify down as far as you can, then use a miller table? or maybe leach?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 02, 2010, 12:50:48 AM
Blister
That is the approach I have taken ...classify as far as you can go ...then go with the Miller Table style recovery.
You can always blue bowl the -30 and -50 and -100 mesh after that I think the Miller has the best chance...just my opinion so far  <-good_>
I am resisting going to chemicals....chemistry was not one of my strong subjects....so rather than burn out a lung or two, I prefer to work with gravity and water.

Fossicker may want to add to this  <-wave->

sluicedog
 :)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 02, 2010, 09:31:20 AM
Hi guys - I have worked quite a bit with the micro gold placers and have a few things I can share.
Firstly the reson that you only see gold in the upper layers is twofold.
The first has to do with scour zone and the second with new gold contributions.
This applies to an enduring sand deposit.
Each year the river is reworking that area but if there is not sufficient energy to flush the entire deposit then the bar will reflect the effect that the energy does have.
This will be in the form of a zone near surface that gets reworked each year. That zone will show certain characterisitcs.
There will be a courser trend to the materials. Even a layer of cobble overlaying fine sand that gets many people scratching their heads.
They can't see how the river could deposit the stones but leave the sand underneath.
In fact what is happening is that the river has enough energy to remove sand from the upper layer but not the courser materials so the lag deposit of cobble builds up and creates a new dynamic on the bar. It forms up an armor layer that further shields the materials under it and prevents the scour from cutting any deeper.
This new layer will further act to retain new micro gold that washes down and across that bar each year. Building up the gold concentration and preventing deposited gold from progressing any deeper because while gold is commonly said to head for bedrock it does not dig its own hole. Gold moves to the lowest area it can within a dilated bed. If the river isn't cutting to bedrock allowing gold moving in sands and gravels to penetrate that far then the gold will be at the bottom of the layer that was moving and that might only be the top two inches of sand on an armour layered bar.

If you were to actually go through the time and energy and money to cut a trench through a bar like this you would find micro gold throughout it but no meaningful concentrations unless in a scour zone. The gold is there but not enough to justify working all that sand.
As for recovery methods you will need to determine the best system by the range of gold you intend to recover. You then have to match that against the volumes of material to move versus the expected return versus the access and ability to mine with certain equipment including permitting and operations.
For a hand miner there is a definite consideration to be made for access.
A hand shovel operation can get into some difficult places pretty easily and since only the upper layers (in the above discussion) are being worked the need to have deep digging capability is eliminated. For bar skimming in fact a hand miner can really come into their own as they can take a very restricted section of best pay and do not need to take massive tonnages of material that bigger equipment would end up taking by default. They will also be able to keep their recovery infrastructure to a minimum as they do not have to upgrade the processing to keep up with the digging equipment or the amounts of lower grade material the bigger equipment grabs.

A well run sluice can recover pretty well down to 100 mesh. After that it becomes harder and harder to work with - demanding more mining infrastructure and more problems with recovery both at the primary stage and from the concentrate.
For sluicing, a fine gold operator needs to think about classifying better than the usual 1/2 inch minus though good recoveries can be made to 100 mesh even at 1/2 inch minus to a good sluice. A two level sluice would be simplest with major effort made to get classified materials to the sluice. A field operation would consider a fine screen trommel of perhaps 20 mesh.
20 mesh plus to the course gold sluice - so in reality that sluice would handle 1/2 minus to 20 mesh plus and then a fine gold sluice using thin laminar flow over low profile riffles or specialty matting.
Unless the operator is willing to do very frequent cleanups black sand could be an issue for the fine gold sluice. Magnetic sep of the black sands before the sluice or a switch to a system that recovers fine gold and is not bothered by black sand would be in order.
That could be a fine gold trommel with the 1/2 inch to plus 20 to a regular sluice and the minus 20 to a small jig. Since the jig can handle discharge of concentrate while running large volumes of black sand are not an issue but accomodation will have to be made when its time to recover the gold from the cons. The jig is also able to get good recovery of gold across a wider range than the sluice so the trommel could be as course as 1/4 inch and the jig would still have good recovery down to 200 mesh gold or finer. If that was the path chosen then the operator would merely run a sluice at the trommel discharge to get tailing away from the end of the trommel and to act as a nugget trap.
I can expand on this stuff later when I have a bit more time if you guys are interested.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Blister on January 02, 2010, 09:43:05 AM
Definitely interested  <-good_>
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 02, 2010, 09:55:13 AM
Interested...Hell yea ...GMS  <-yahoo_>

I am still trying to get my head around these Jigs you speak of, every picture I see only shows the outside and very rarely the inside  <-thinking->

Are these bad boys (jigs) something a reasonably handy fellow could build themselves ?

Does any one have any drawings or DIY information....the double sluice is a good idea...however if the gold is assumed to be -100 to begin with, would this change the strategy on equipment construction?

sluicedog
 :)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 02, 2010, 11:16:24 AM
I'm a centrifuge guy myself. Jigs are slick, but it would require some fairly industrial fabrication equipment to whip one up from what I have seen. Not something to backpack in either. A flat sluice with magnetic sign on the bottom for riffles is pretty good, but classification is key as GMS said. Nothing bigger than the 20 mesh should be allowed onto the magnetic riffles.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 02, 2010, 05:02:14 PM
I really like centrifuges and have worked with most of the commercial ones and several custom fabricated designs over the years.
The non water injected type might have some application in this format. Mosty because of cost and ease of operation.
Centrifuges get top markes for upgrade ratios compared to jigs. Many jig operations run their con to a centrifuge as the next step to get a richer con.
Many of the other commercial systems for centrifuges are mega expensive for a hand shovel operation.
There are many jig designs out there and some would be fairty easy to have built but even a small system is still not easy to drag into the middle of nowhere.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 02, 2010, 05:29:28 PM
This seems to be a closely guarded secret  could GMS and Will care to share some of this knowledge or should I just take up basket weaving  ^#!

sluicedog
 :)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Sleeping Village on January 02, 2010, 06:04:43 PM
Cool thread.

Makes me wonder, though... Is there really enough micro gold to make it worth while when we should be able to acquire and work a deposit that's potentially richer?

Maybe only certain areas? And for sure, if you could capture the micro gold as well as the bigger stuff it would only increase overall efficiency, and make better of your time spent...



Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 02, 2010, 07:03:11 PM
Just a thought or two on micro or fine gold, (A)nuggets are harder to find than diamonds,(B)fine and micro gold make up in the area of 99% of all the alluvial golds,(C) if you can catch and recover fine and micro gold you can catch and recover all...............at least that makes sense to me ;D....Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 02, 2010, 07:58:25 PM
We here at Epiphany Mining are just finishing up our centrifuge prototype and expect to finish up beta testing this week. It will catch face powder fines. It is portable - 150 lbs, and is gas powered. We will be field testing it on a bar that has pretty rich fines down here within the next couple of weeks.

Wish us luck. We intend to have them for sale later in the year.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: IdahoBob on January 02, 2010, 08:16:34 PM
OK, my turn. I've been dealing with fine gold for several years now.
Our river gold runs anywhere from -20 to -300. You retreive it from the first 6 inches and that's it. No need to threaten China. I modified my Keene A52 sluice box by adding felt to the flare.
I also added a spray bar. I don't run riffles, just the felt followed by deep V rubber mat.
Clean up is similar to using a Le Trap...tilt to one side and wash it out.
After running my material through this setup all summer I removed the felt and torched it in a steel pan. I blue-bowled the incinerated remains and discovered thousands of pieces of micro gold. The micro gold gets into the felt and there's no way to remove it by means other than torching. The fiber size of felt most closely matches that required to catch gold of that size. Much like miners moss has a very large open weave for the larger gold.
If I was to hunt for nothing but -100 mesh gold, I'd line the entire sluice with felt and nothing else. When your felt starts to tint yellow, it's time to torch.
You can find more info with pics on my Bedrock or Bust (http://bedrockorbust.blogspot.com) blog.

Bob
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 02, 2010, 08:22:31 PM
Okay IdahoBob,

The prove is in the pudding they say, how much gold in grams or oz did you get from your felt from how many yards of materials washed , I'm curious how well this system would work, you may be on to something there...Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 02, 2010, 08:30:25 PM
IdahoBob....about time you pitched in  <-good_>  ;D <-laugh-> :)

A fellow I know uses potatoe sack...hemp or burlap...what ever you want to call ...dirt cheap.
He uses about 6 layers and stitches them together at the top ...then ...like you burns it.
Have you tried the hemp? or is felt the answer ?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: IdahoBob on January 02, 2010, 08:45:51 PM
Greywolf...I have never kept gold seperated by size so I have no idea of quantity.
Sluicedog...Hemp, yeah I can just see myself burning that and getting flashbacks from the 60's.  ;)
Oh, Sluicedog, check out my "Dog Gone Sluice" on my blog...seems appropriate with your handle.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 02, 2010, 09:23:34 PM
Idaho....cough...cough...hummm I sort of remember the 60s .....it's a bit of a fogg  <-hypnotized-> <-hypnotized->  <-good_>

The flashbacks  <~ShOcK~>  ;D :)

What blog,,,,, :o ^#! <-thinking-> <-dont~know->
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: IdahoBob on January 02, 2010, 09:29:51 PM
My blog is hyperlinked in the last line of my original post but to make it easy for you I'll post it again  <-good_>
Bedrock or Bust (http://bedrockorbust.blogspot.com)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 02, 2010, 09:32:01 PM
Sluicedog,

I would refer you to paper SP 87 from State of California, on placer recovery methods. Its good.

Another good study is by Randy Clarkson called 'Placer Gold Recovery Research'.

Both are real eye openers about how much gold goes out the pooper  from sluice boxes, and how to catch fines.
I would love to take the tails from sluices and class them right into my centrifuge...
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 02, 2010, 10:14:41 PM
Howdy All,
I thought I would pass along my latest kick in gold prospecting - looking for micro flood gold in rivers.

The Fossicker

Thanks for the info on your latest adventure, may you find your fortune in American rivers everywhere. :)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 02, 2010, 10:19:24 PM
Feeling a little provincial there Jen?   ;)                                                               [email protected]*
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 02, 2010, 10:34:52 PM
Something that may explain why the fine gold seems to occur in the top six inched only......Guest

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 02, 2010, 10:38:45 PM
Feeling a little provincial there Jen?   ;)                                                               [email protected]*

(Giving Will a hug as she writes the reply... nothing personal, my comments aren't about American's (I am one after all), they're about certain powers to be in govt. and their beliefs)

Yup, there's a reason why I gave up everything I owned in America, including a 6 figure salary to return home to Canada. I'd rather be jobless, broke and homeless sitting on the edges of the Fraser River with a gold pan in my hand than sitting at a desk of one of America's biggest defense contractors knowing that the software I was working on was making me rich but was going to cost an innocent Iraqi, Afghan, Yemenis boy or girl their life.

My signature line says it all (and if it's needed to be said, the statement in my signature line is MY feelings, not those of this board or the membership there of).
 
:)
Jen
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 03, 2010, 09:09:39 AM
Another recovery option would be along the lines of some of the rocker designs that Chuck has been developing. Slower than a sluice but better efficiency with a minimalist approach to operation and infrastructure.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: fatkat on January 03, 2010, 12:51:35 PM
This is very interesting ...the larger portion of gold in the uk is micro ..ie not many nuggets

I too have seen the coble layer on gravel bars ....and after much thinking  came to the conclusion allready proposed !  least my logic is heading in the right dirrection !

I've built a simple recurculating mini sluice to seperate the black sand and micro gold ...I'm finding in a river close to home ...

the sluice is a u shaped gutter made of plastic about 3" dia   currently a 1m length ..though I'm thinking of cutting into two and sort of high baking them to save space .  In the gutter is cheap rubber car mat this is made of 1cm sqares seperated by a 3mm ridge  around the square ...  the whole is set over a bucket containing a  500L per hour electric pump ...the flow is not great   but you need to dam the end to get a nice steady flow rather than the pumps velocity ....

panning produces about a 1000ml of cons ..theses are feed to the mini sluice using a desert spoon .....it takes about five minutes to send the lot through then I leave the pump running for about 20 .....I then clean up the sluice and get about 10ml of black sand and hopefully gold ...in most case only three or four grains at about 0.2mm dia ....I'm nolw upto about 50 grains ..the british geolgic survey found one grain when they tested the gravels...so I'm ahead of the game !

though this is not strictly flood gold .....its origins are the red trassic sediments ...thought to be from precipitation of dissolved gold in sea water in a very high saline solution ...Which suggests that there loads of gold in the streams of the uk midlands  thats just not been see as its very small !  several of the grain show a crystaline form which  does lead me to think that the precipitation idea might hold water ...
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 03, 2010, 08:07:58 PM
Howdy All,
Wow! looking at all of the replies, it looks like I've hit on a subject that interests a lot of us gold seekers. Okay let's get down to it. First I will qualify my equipment. As no big surprise to some of you, I use the Cleangold System for micro gold recovery. As like many of you, I was interested in retrieving that small and micro gold you see in the black sand and gravels. This led me to start looking at the different systems available that could achieve this goal without necessarily breaking my piggy bank. Many of these systems have, and are discussed on this Forum. In fact one of these systems (chalk board) was interesting to me as a possible way to attack this problem. I picked this because I figured a way to classify the particles to be fed into it in such a way to possibly eliminate much of the black sand problem. While researching this method, I was approached by a man at one of the Gold Shows I do. He asked me if I would like to see something interesting. That demonstration was the Cleangold Prospector Sluice. It took me about 1 minute to realise that whatever I had in mind to achieve the results I was looking for was solved with this system. Since that time I have become a distributor and innovator of the Cleangold System and use it regularly to retrieve fine and micro gold under various conditions. Most of the technology in the Cleangold System is fairly straight forward and many of the techniques over the years have been worked out to a fair degree by the inventor, David Plath who has the Patent. One interesting point about his invention is that there are people running around who use this system and claim that it's their idea or that theirs is different. These folks are rip offs (you know who you are) and they are setting themselves up for a law suite! Meanwhile, the Cleangold System is being used all over the world by professional mining operations (including hardrock) except here, which for some reason is not taking note of this new economical way of retrieving micro gold without the hassle of black sand build up. Go figure.... So much for the moment about Cleangold. Now onto the subject of finding micro gold.

I usually look for micro gold and platinum on the ocean beaches though my latest kick is the rivers. Normally I seek out black sand layers as much of the time micro gold collects there. This is not the only place micro gold will collect though, so sometimes when I find regular placer gravels of flood gold I'll classify the material and run it through. At the beginning of this thread I mention doing gravel bars at the mouth of rivers. I was set back some by there only being micro gold in the first inch and not in the rest of these high dunes covered by cobbles. After thinking about it, I think Golly Mr. Science has it right on why this is happening. By the way Golly, I did trench that sand bar to flat ground and 2 feet past that to be sure - almost nothing showed up. I talked to David Plath about this and he said about the same thing you did. Good on yea!  To answer about using felt, hemp, cough, cough, or what else not, is used in many parts of the world to collect small gold. In fact hemp was used by the early prospectors of Japan as a Sluice! By the way Jen , there is micro gold in every major river system in the world - not just America. One last tid-bit. Using the Randy Clarkston method works well, but only to 100 mesh. Let's keep this thread going - I think we're all learning something from it and black sand gold is an interesting subject. Right? Cheers.

The Fossicker

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Blister on January 03, 2010, 08:35:32 PM
 Fossicker , I think the reason Clean Gold hasn't caught on here is the lack of information. As you said yourself, it only took you a minute to realize the potential of the system, but this was after seeing it preform. Going to the Clean Gold website, don't add much more than talking points to the equation. It seems the direction the company wanted to take was to introduce a viable alternative in 3rd world countries where mercury is a problem. It appears to be well received in these countries, but yet again only after seeing it in action. Perhaps a video, similar to the  Maverick and Propan videos would help start the ball rolling in this part of the world. I've been interested for sometime now, but the lack of information has held me back.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 03, 2010, 08:48:03 PM
I feel the same...Blister

A better video in a real life situation would surely help  <-good_>

I just have pictures of a layer of black sand stuck to the magnet...and then how do you get it off  <-thinking-> plus it will be filled with fine and micron gold...

It seems we haven't gotten any further on the gold separation...or have I missed something  <-dont~know->

now we have gold and concentrated black sand......all of us love this combination  ^#!

Oh ya..... lets throw in some garnets for color  :'( :'( :'(
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 03, 2010, 09:00:39 PM
Dunno about the patent issues, I have intermittently used mag sign in my sluice during the late eighties into the early nineties until I decided to give up beach mining. Cleangold got his patent over 10 years after I and others were doing this (1999). Hopefully he made sufficient improvements to fix the typical problems I noted then.

Its centrifuge time for me. I have no impulses to go backward to something I have already tried and deemed inefficient. I just finished my spin baby spin tonight.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 03, 2010, 10:32:17 PM
Howdy Willthedancer,
So you and others failed to make it work, but David Plath didn't. This is why he has a Patent and his system is working all over the world, but you don't. By the way, the Cleangold against the Centrifuge proved more efficient at the Global Mercury Project done at the BC University. Go figure. Cheers.

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Blister on January 04, 2010, 05:55:41 AM
 I've searched both the UBC and UNIDO sites, found lots of info on the Global Mercury Project, but nothing including Cleangold. Can you possibly post this study/paper or maybe provide a link ? Sounds like interesting reading.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 04, 2010, 07:00:57 AM
Howdy Willthedancer,
So you and others failed to make it work, but David Plath didn't. This is why he has a Patent and his system is working all over the world, but you don't. By the way, the Cleangold against the Centrifuge proved more efficient at the Global Mercury Project done at the BC University. Go figure. Cheers.

The Fossicker

I would not say that I failed to make it work, but I will say that it was not worth my time. I certainly am not the originator of this device, but saw it used here by many, and thought I would give it the try it deserved, and was ultimately disappointed. Catching micron gold at one gravity is not easy, and in ALL of the literature I have at my disposal, there are only 2 efficient ways to do it. jigs and Centrifuges. I did not choose to try making a jig, because it looked like voodoo mining to me back at the point when I started my current project. I have gotten more info since then, but jigging is not as efficient as spinning, and my folks down here want new centrifuges to replace their ageing ones.

 Anytime I see someone make the claim that their single gravity solution is more effective for extracting gold from sand than the multi gravity methods, I say the same 2 things. 1) Show me the study- it needs to be an independent one with fire assays on the tails from a licensed assayer, and 2) no one gets to disobey the laws of physics here.

Personally, I do not like your tone.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 04, 2010, 10:29:45 AM
Ok to stir the pot a little:
A bit of a foundation to work from in the consideration of the relative merits of various systems and some thoughts on how to evaluate their "efficiency".

Great care must be taken to truly determine the true recoverable gold in a sample and that is not as easy as some would think.
The first consideration is recoverable to what method?
A classic error is to fire assay black sand cons.
Yes it can be done to advantage but the results cannot be considered as definative without first determining how much of the gold in the assay actually came from free gold particles versus gold still locked into the black sand and/or other minerals and then comparing that to the system to be used to get the gold from the con to the pouring mold.
I have spent literally days at an electron microscope examining placer gold and gold locked into mineral grains found in placer deposits.
To simplify the conclusions the gold in a placer deposit will reflect the the origins of that gold.
That may sound obvious but lets examine that.
The majority of gold found in hardrock deposits is less than 40 microns! That means that those particles START OUT at between 300 and 400 mesh and they don't get any bigger than that - only finer. Placer recovery methods are already hampered by that.
It means that from the get go a placer plant is chasing what in nature are anomalous gold particles. The 100 mesh stuff is NUGGETS compared to general hardrock gold.

Now compound the issue by adding in unliberated gold. That is gold still locked into host mineral grains. We already know about gold trapped in sulphides and black sands as many placer people have discovered this by assaying their black sands. However - a whole whack of gold never got caught - firstly because the equipment was not up to recovering gold of that size and secondly because the gold was still locked into mineral grains that - for the most part - were not recoverable by specific gravity methods. This would be the gold that was still locked into the host quartz for instance. The combination of a little bit of gold still locked to a chunk of quartz is a combined specific gravity profile that will not report as a heavier specific gravity.

How does this reflect in the testing of recovery efficiency?
Simply put - assaying a con without breaking out the free gold can lead to major errors.
Also not taking into account the high grade con versus the total recovered gold and the reporting error that can occur.
Consider this as a concentration ratio issue.
One piece of equipment produces a concentration ratio of 1000 to one while another produces a concentration ratio of 100 to one.
Lets assume that both operators run 1000 tonnes. The one operator will have one tonne of con - the other will have 10 tonnes.
If a straight assay of the cons were done the 1000 to one con would come up as a higher value per ton of that con even if - and this is important -the 100 to one system actually recovered more real gold!
Its just that the 100 to one system diluted the value in the con.
In practice (and advertizing hype) the high grade con operator says "I am recovering 200 ounces per tonne of concentrate" - his recovery ratio would represent 1/5 ounce of gold per tonne of bank run. The lower concentration ratio operator says "I am recovering 25 ounces of gold per tonne of concentrate" - his recovery ratio would represent 1/4 of an ounce per tonne of bank run. He is recovering more of the gold from the deposit BUT he has ten times as much concentrate to deal with to get the recovered gold out and that is a BIG factor in economics.
Since the name of the game is actual recovered gold from the primary deposit the 100 to one system might be the system of choice IF and only if the extra recovery was economically viable to recover downstream of the primary system. That would mean investigating how to best get to actual poured gold and if the infrastructure and time and energy needed to recover the gold is worth it.
This is why sluices are still the norm.
They produce a high concentration ratio of gold that is recoverable for the level of enterprise and technology and investment that the operator has. What good to recover 600 mesh gold if the downstream system to actually get that gold cannot reccover finer than 400 mesh? Is there enough gold recovered in the minus 400 mesh sizes to justify the cost and effort to recover it? Was there enough minus 150 mesh gold in the deposit to justify something other than a sluice and if not why blow your brains out chasing something that is just an illusion of value?
In the simplest terms would a hand shovel operator be better to spend $8000 on a system to recover every bit of gold down to 600 mesh and then another 10,000 on a system to take that gold out of the cons when the gold represented by the sizes below the efficiency of his hand shovel sluice might only represent 10% of the value of the deposit? At the hand shovel or small scale mining levels the operator can offset that economic loss by simply throwing in another shovel full of dirt! That would be one extra shovelful for every 10 shovelfuls to basically cover the losses and not change the system.
If you are dealing with a project running 100's of tonnes per hour it becomes a factor to consider but at 20 tonnes or less - not so much.
Guys its not just the best technolgy it is the best APPROPRIATE technology that will win in the end. If not by design then by default as operators come to the same conclusions by trial and error or hard economics.
What you catch has to be weighed against what went in versus what it cost to get it.
Fundamental to the process is an understanding of the deposit and what needs to be done to recover the most gold economically. We would all like to recover every atom of gold but folks it just aint possible and an operator has to determine where the economics are most favourable.
Showing up with a big expensive system to work a deposit that by virtue of the nature of its emplacement has no benefit to recovering gold any finer than 120 mesh is a waste of time, effort and energy.
Thats where trying to find the best jack of all trades kinds of equipment and getting a clear understanding of the limitations of various systems can be a project saver.
Having said all that I will come back at the micro gold recovery systems in my next post.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 04, 2010, 10:44:07 AM
GollyMr Science....good post  <-good_>

For most of the forum members I suppose we have to let go of the idea of recovering that last ATOM of gold out of our heads. <-yes_>

But I suppose we see so little of it (gold)... that we are paranoid to waste any...but as you say throw in another shovel full.

Or develop better recovery methods...I look forward to your next post  <-good_>

sluicedog
 :)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 04, 2010, 10:49:31 AM
I think I'm waiting for the Paul Harvey thing, The Rest Of The Story,  <-yes_>....if you can't pan it out, it's to small to catch economically through gravity separation, ...Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: garyww on January 04, 2010, 08:32:07 PM
One of the problems with capturing extremely fine gold is that you really can't see it without magnification until you've collected it into small groups or piles of particles. I was amazed at really how much ultra fine stuff is caught in a regular old sluice when I was doing my riffle tests but most of it is wasted away during the secondary processing. I took some pictures that are in my Miller Table article of particles that are typically lost if you're not specifically looking for it. For this reason it's my opinion that initially finding and capturing the micro material with conventional gear is fairly easy but finding a fast way to process it is a big problem. Fast is the keyword since you've got to work a trememdous amount of material to make this type of mining cost effective.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 04, 2010, 09:14:13 PM
Garyww,

Okay now it's fairly easy to capture fine gold in a sluice some riffle types work better then others, and thats all fine and dandy, I've worked with a bowl, and a greenboard, a wheel,
and still there is a fair bit of real fine gold in the concentrates that is just not recoverable, you can seen it just barely with the naked eye, I've got good eyes, so it's real fine stuff, just can't seem to be able to recover it at any rate of speed, there fore while entertaining not real economically worth bugger all........Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 04, 2010, 11:07:26 PM
Howdy Grayww,
I sort of agree with you. Though I can collect the very small micro gold (270 mesh is the cut off for the human eye) I prefere to keep it to 200 mesh for my cut off point. One problem though, black sand or not, is flake and barrel shaped gold. It is much harder to work with, but I'm going after that problem and hope to solve it in an easy manner as well. As was mentioned before, under a microscope much of the micro gold looks like little nuggets and many of them have character to boot! Anyway, don't sell the small stuff too short as there are areas that are rich in it and worth the effort. Cheers.

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: oldgo;dminer on January 05, 2010, 06:20:11 AM


First post here, hello all.
LOL, big fingered blundered my user name signing in.
It was meant to be oldgoldminer, ohh well.

I was referred here from another forum.
Not long back, acquired a fine gold property.
By "fine", I mean the placer gold here will fall right through a 150 mesh screen.
(smallest screen I have)

(http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/9/8/8/4/6/1/webimg/334069770_o.jpg)
This is a low "bar" on the snake river in Idaho USA
White line is a mile long, to give you an idea of the scale of it.

Surface has a thin skin of either wind blown dust, or silt about 5 inches deep.
Below that is sand & small pebbles.
No overburden, to speak off & just scrub grass scattered here & there.

There are some old workings on the site & shallow pits all over the place.
It appears they were done turn of the century & the depression era.
No course cobble show in any of the existing pits.
Everything showing is 3/4 minus or below.

Panning samples from the pits turned up so much micro-fine gold, the boys thought the site might have been "salted".

So they used a post hole digger, to do about 30 small shallow virgin holes spread over the site.

Once below the skin cover, they recovered ultra fine gold by panning in every hole the dug.
Some, better than others, but the gold is everywhere.
No idea of depth to depth to bedrock.

Come spring, plan is to use a truck mounted hollow core churn hole drill to grid pattern drill sample the site.
To get a better idea of depth, material size & what’s there.

From sketchy historical data the first folks that got here, could recover 4 to 8 ounces a day.
Using hand shovels, rocker box & mercury to amalgamate the dust.

Historical data indicates the richer deposits were formed like this, over thousands of years.
(http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/9/8/8/4/6/1/webimg/334615895_o.jpg)

In this example the #5 is at the surface, the rest buried.
This jibes with where the biggest surface working are on this bar.

I have been around long enough to know panning can "fool" you.
As,  careful panning can recover micro-fine gold that will shoot right out of a sluice box.

Again, historical data shows the old timers used burlap, or sail cloth to line their sluices with.
I'm thinking...if the drill testing shows promise……..trommel... to classify to 1/4 inch minus.
The run those fines over a sluice box with a series of 20 mesh screens in it.
Where those fines could drop into lateral sluices, lined with rough top conveyor belting.

(http://img.auctiva.com/imgdata/9/8/8/4/6/1/webimg/334059186_o.jpg)

Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Certainly, I realize until its drill tested, we are talking “smoke” here.
But, assuming the drill testing shows promise.
The trick would be how to recover enough gold, to make a profit.

Never worked such fine gold, so this is a new ball game to me.
Have run placers, where the gold ranged from fine (40 mesh) to ¼ inch.
But, never, all micro fine gold.

This one may be far bigger than I can chew.









Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 05, 2010, 11:40:06 AM
Last time I checked they are paying the same for an ounce of 150 mesh gold as they are for an ounce of 40 mesh and once poured into a bar its a moot point anyway.

The trick is to determine the economics of the deposit before the final decisions are made on equipment OR design equipment that can do a certain job and don't expect it to perform on every deposit.
You could go straight to the highest recovery system possible - spend the money and build the biggest, meanest, most gold getting thing ever and spend two ounces of gold to get one ounce out.
Striking the right balance is the key.
Throughput versus recovery and the costs of operation have to be part of the equation.
Now a hand shovel operation is not so strict - especially if your beans and bacon don't rely on your production.
Still it would be nice to optimize the recovery so each shovel full gets the most gold it can.
Against that for a hand miner is capital cost, operations costs and access.
Access can be a real show stopper. Compare a basic high banker and what it takes to get that into your favorite spot. Now turn that into something weighing 600 pounds and built big enough to be awkward as all get out and imagine trying to drag that through the trees and down the cliff and you can see where access becomes real important.
I have worked in some pretty darn remote and primitve spots and having to break stuff down into tiny bite sized pieces so it can be hauled in can really take the jolly out of a guy.
Many a fancy gold getter sits in somebody's garage because the operator can't get it to where they want to without a chopper or a passle of willing helpers - three days with a chain saw and maybe a small CAT to break trail. The spontainaity is all gone - the mobility severley reduced and therefore the areas accessable on short notice or in remote locations is essentially gone.
Some of you have also touched on one of the real pains and that is recovering fine gold at the primary stage and not having a suitable system to handle the cons to actually get that gold out. Never mind that for most small scale operators that no see'um gold only represents a small fraction of the gold recovered - it keeps showing up to taunt ya.
Not only that but the nagging question haunts a prospector - "If I caught this how much of it got away and should I be doing something about it???"
There usually follows a process that is akin to figuring out how to cook up a pig you ain't caught yet with many a fun hour spent designing the perfect system. Thats what long winter nights are for.
Some things to consider:

Going to a highly efficient primary recovery system without upgrading the separation system is gonna get you in trouble.

Using a very efficient testing system helps determine the nature of the deposit and gives some guidance towards economics and equipment decisions but if the actual primary recovery plant is going to be less efficient than the test system an operator has to allow for that. Thats one reason why assay got a bad name in placer. Super high efficiency test method that cannot be duplicated at the real world level and placer operators not having any way to make allowances for the difference because assay (at least standard approaches) doesn't tell you a heck of a lot about the gold you are chasing and how much of that  gold is actually recoverable in your equipment.

One way to test is to use a testing system that comes close to the recoveries that your primary recovery system will use. Either a smaller version of it or a method that comes close to duplicating the efficiency. Thats why panning has been so well accepted as a test method as a careful panner can recover most gold that standard recovery methods can so there is a baseline to work from. A VERY careful panner who is willing to classify on narrow screen differences can pretty well cover the recovery rate of free gold from nuggets down to 400 mesh for most standard equipment from sluices to centrifuges. Taking the gold recovered and doing sieve sizing to see where the majority of the gold is reporting will help guide equipment decisions. It can also help determine some economics but that should not be based on just a couple of pans and thats for sure. In an ideal world usng this system the panner would run a bunch of pans of known weight and/or volume then dry and sieve the gold - weigh each fraction then determine what bigger equipment best suited the recovery of the major portion of the gold. Then they would get a small verison of that bigger equipment and run larger samples to see if the assumptions held and to do wider testing of the prospect and THEN they would look at production.
For hand miners though the equation is considerably shorter. Since the pan is the first test and the sluice, in either stream or highbanker form, is the standard production system the sluice serves as both the bulk sample pilot plant AND the production plant. I hazard a guess that many a hobby hand mining decision is based on how far the operator could drag the equipment and if there is a good place in the stream to keep the beer cold.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: oldgo;dminer on January 05, 2010, 01:40:27 PM
Hollow core churn hole drilling the site on a grid pattern will result in 20, 30 or more yards of material, dependent on depth & how tight the grid pattern is. Plan is to split the cores, then run ½ on a practical, but the best recovery system possible. To give us a “ball park” figure of the values, and hopefully outline the higher grade zones. Then, use the other ½ for test runs on a small scale pilot plant, equivalent to what think best to use for actual production.  I’m financing this one alone, out of my hip pocket. So, the budgets are tight.

The 1st issue is, how much value is there & of that, how much can we recover economically. The 2nd issue is the most frugal practical means to get the material to & through the plant, then back again. As reclamation is going to be a big issue here. Since the bench bar is barren, except for some grass. I would wager no issues there. As once done, we simply hydro-seed it again with native grass. We have riparian water rights on the river, so water use is not an issue. But, turbidity of effluent water will be a big issue, So, we a whole series of variables to consider. One step at a time, slow & easy.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 05, 2010, 01:56:27 PM
For hand miners though the equation is considerably shorter. Since the pan is the first test and the sluice, in either stream or highbanker form, is the standard production system the sluice serves as both the bulk sample pilot plant AND the production plant. I hazard a guess that many a hobby hand mining decision is based on how far the operator could drag the equipment

Yeah that's main reason I like to have my backpack highbanker smaller one for prospecting and larger one for handmin-in, the bigger one is 12 wide and can handle 1-1 1/2 yards per hour, depends on how ambitious you get, with pump and shovels, picks, prybars, buckets, hoses and gasoline and other nicnacks about 100 to 125 lbs of gear, so you can make two trips or partner up with someone trust worthy (and thats a whole new story) pack it all in up to a few miles or more,  remember you alway have to pack it back out someday, then you're all set up and only got to pack gasoline in and concentrates and gold bullion out everyday <-yahoo_> <-yes_> <-yes_> sounds real good doesn't <-yes_> <-NO_> <-yes_> <-NO_> <-good_> oh yeah theres still a lot of back breaking work to do but at least your only working for yourself................and thats a good thing..........Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: fredgold on January 05, 2010, 05:02:36 PM
Hi Fossicker
You say that the cleangold sluice is patent, what's the patent # ? I searched the web and can't find anything that relates to the cleansluice.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 05, 2010, 08:01:24 PM
I've been reading but not posting lately but I just had to reply to this thread.

To get micron gold down into the nanometers I use  menhaden oil  (fish oil used by fishermen)  I pump stream sediment into a (closed top) 55 gallon drum thru about 1/4 gallon of oil.  You have to have the water draining from the bottom as fast as it is entering or you will lose your oil.  I use a mesh screen at the inlet of the suction hose to stop anything too large from getting sucked up.  In the drum the outlet hose should have a spray nozzel.  When I'm done pumping I hook up my suction hose to the outlet of the drum and recirculate/agitate the oil with liquid detergent and borax.  This releases the gold from the oil.  Then I use a coagulant/flocculant.  The coagulant/flocculant binds together the gold suspended in the water and drops it.    Pretty simple!

Centrifuges are probably the next best option but they can only recover down in the 50 micron area. (horizontal centrifuges)  300 mesh gold basically stays suspended in the turbid water in a centirfuge.  With oil you can recover down into nanometers.

Before anyone asks, yes there is a certain amount of junk in the bottom of the tank along with the gold.  Not much but yes there is!  Does any of the oil escape... Yes! but not much and it is fish oil.  Tens of thousands of gallons of it are dumped into waters yearly!
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: garyww on January 05, 2010, 09:12:01 PM
MrScience kind of beat me to the punch on this one as I was going to talk about panning and microscopic gold as I think most people don't believe that panning can capture ultra fine material. I can say for sure that it does and most of us throw away all that microscopic material after we snuffer up what we can see with the naked eye. If you want a surprise scan the bottom of your pan with a really powerful magnifying glass after you think you've collected all the gold. Pan sampling is still the best and cheapest way to prospect a site and not as slow as one might imagine.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 05, 2010, 09:53:13 PM
Howdy All,
There's some great posts here tonight and I want to jump in to address some of this most interesting debate and subject, but duty calls. I'll answer what I can tomorrow. Cheers.

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 05, 2010, 09:59:14 PM
What da,   WHAT DA <-dont~know-> was Dhat.........Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 06, 2010, 06:22:49 AM
I was hoping that Fossicker would have a video of the cleangold sluice, would like to see this puppyin action, anything to make life simpler <-good_>.....Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 06, 2010, 06:53:34 AM
The fish oil approach is using the principles of floatation and adsorption. If its working for ya thats great!
Would need a pretty darn rich deposit to pay though. It would be neat to see it in action.
I have worked with standard floatation for hardrock and would never consider even trying it on bank run placer materials  - too much of a pain. Too many variables and even if using pine oil too expensive. On the adsorption side there is a neat invention using specialty adsorptive beads that is agitated in a slurry to grab gold, platinum and diamonds selectively from the suspended slurry. I worked with the inventor of that technology on platinum and gold recovery. Very cool to look at them under a microscope after they have gathered a bunch of super fine gold on the surface.
One thing about oil adsorption is that it will grab gold so fine that gravity concentrators don't stand a chance of catching any meaningful amount of it. The oil doesn't care about the weight or specific gravity so if the particle is adsorptive it will grab it. There must be a lower cutoff in size but I don't know what that is - it would be down where microscopic meets "stupid tiny" I expect. 
I was doing some research with a group using adsorptive films to grab gold in nanoparticle sizes. Those particles were in the 10 to 20 atoms in size. I would not expect that technology to be showing up in a sluicebox ay time soon.  <-laugh->
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 06, 2010, 07:07:37 AM
GollyMrScience,

You don't need a pretty darn rich deposit but it would be nice! When you pump sediment/water into the tank in a fraction of a second you are processing more material than anyone can pan in a few minutes.  In an hour it will process more material than anyone could pan in a month.  You use a coagulant to bind and collect the gold.

Coagulation is the destabilization of colloids by neutralizing the forces that keep them apart.  Cationic coagulants provide positive electric charges to reduce the negative charge (zeta potential) of the colloids.  As a result, the particles collide to form larger particles (flocs).  Rapid mixing is required to disperse the coagulant throughout the liquid.  Care must be taken not to overdose the coagulants as this can cause a complete charge reversal and restabilize the colloid complex.

Flocculation, is the action of polymers to form bridges between the flocs. and bind the particles into large agglomerates or clumps.  Bridging occurs when segments of the polymer chain adsorb on different particles and help particles aggregate.  An anionic flocculant will react against a positively charged suspension, adsorbing on the particles and causing destabilization either by bridging or charge neutralization.  In this process it is essential that the flocculating agent be added by slow and gentle mixing to allow for contact between the small flocs and to agglomerate them into larger particles.  The newly formed agglomerated particles are quite fragile and can be broken apart by shear forces during mixing.  Care must also be taken to not overdose the polymer as doing so will cause settling/clarification problems.  Anionic polymers themselves are lighter than water.  As a result, increasing the dosage will increase the tendency of the floc to float and not settle.

Once suspended particles are flocculated into larger particles, they can usually be removed from the liquid by sedimentation, provided that a sufficient density difference exists between the suspended matter and the liquid.  Such particles can also be removed or separated by media filtration, straining or floatation.  When a filtering process is used, the addition of a flocculant may not be required since the particles formed by the coagulation reaction may be of sufficient size to allow removal.  The flocculation reaction not only increases the size of the floc particles to settle them faster, but also affects the physical nature of the floc, making these particles less gelatinous and thereby easier to dewater.

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 06, 2010, 12:00:28 PM
I went to check the cleangold website but their hosting account is suspended. 

The cleangold sluice more than likely uses the same or material similar to magnetic signs.  Magnetking.com has some blank magnetic sign material in rolls.  It sure looks the same as cleangold sluice material. 

My thought is that if it works it would be on youtube and other video sites for people to see it working. 

Is there any better advertisement than one that shows a product working?

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: garyww on January 06, 2010, 12:43:31 PM
The Cleangold systems seems to come and go and the product seems to move from site to site but their sluices do work so this isn't a scam operation but just a mom and pop type endeavor so bear with the makers until they get a permanant home.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: johanssonsan on January 06, 2010, 01:16:04 PM
A few seconds Cleangold....

cleangold in suriname (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4375612020784552233#)

More to read:

home (http://www.artminers.org/artminers/home.html)

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 06, 2010, 02:34:45 PM
Alpha are you saying you are working with a selective coagulant? Doesn't fit my understanding of the fish oil process. I'm all ears.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: johanssonsan on January 06, 2010, 03:59:00 PM
This is a way of using magnetism in a Eldorado sluice. Two layers of magnetic sign material on a slick plate covered with one layer of clear film. Makes it easy to lift of the clear film and take care of the black sand.

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/original/26797369.jpg

 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: honeyman76 on January 06, 2010, 04:02:25 PM
Awesome Idea Johanssonan! I might have to give this a go this year!
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 06, 2010, 05:16:35 PM
Alpha are you saying you are working with a selective coagulant? Doesn't fit my understanding of the fish oil process. I'm all ears.

GollyMrScience,

I'm not using any selective coagulant, Any coagulant for metals will work.  There are coagulants that will work with oil and metal but I prefer to use soap to emulsify/breakdown the oil and then use a clay based (dry) coagulant.  It's bio degradable.  Any water treatment supply house would have something that can be used.

Before any of you try this keep in mind that fish oil usually contains iodine that must be evaporated out.  If you don't evaporate it out it may desolve the gold.

Nick
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 06, 2010, 07:40:04 PM
Nick,

I'm a little confused, now I get the part of using an floation process with fish oil to capture the micro gold particules and then flushing the overburden type material out of the 55 gallon container in the on going process, sort of makes sense, using the fish oil to catch the gold and float it in suspension then scrap it out and refine it, by I'm guessing smelting or leaching it, not real sure how the iodine in fish oil would dissolve the gold in the slurry as you say your running the slurry through at a rate of what 3-5 gallons per min-hour? or some what faster than panning.  Okay now iodine leaching is a process that most of us have heard of, but the from what I've been able to ascertain is that while gold or platinum can be dissolved by iodine the process is fairly long, some where in the area of 24 to 48 hours to dissolve gold and then it depends on the PH levels as to how fast the disolving process is, so couldn't you just lower the PH level and not have to worry about the iodine in the fish oil, just be able to scrap the mess out and send it away...........Guest

Curious, what would be the percentage of iodine in fish oil, I have been under the impression that the only commericial method of iodine extraction was from seaweed...
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 06, 2010, 08:16:36 PM
greywolf,

Iodine in the fish oil I use is...

Iodine Value (Wijs) Range of 170 - 200  I don't have a clue what a Wijs is?  But I do know that nanometer sized gold is about as tiny as something can get.  One micron = 2000 nanometers. 

I have let a pump run for hours at a time.  At times up to 30 gallons a minute.  Until I rinse down/emulsify/break down the oil with soap the gold is in the oil.  It wouldn't take much iodine to put those tiny nanometer particles onto solution.  Iodine in low concentrations actually leaches gold very quickly.  Gold Leaching With IODINE | . (http://www.e-goldprospecting.com/html/gold_leaching_with_iodine.html )
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 06, 2010, 08:47:31 PM
Okay did a little checking   now with your     Iodine Value (Wijs) Range of 170 - 200    which is actually real close to 1 grams of iodine to 100 ml of solution so rogh a 1/100 mixture of 1% solution, gold needs a minumin of a 7 percent solution to dissolve , and as you are continuously flushing with a water and slurry mixture wondering what the concern would be will 1% iodine in the oil???....................Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 06, 2010, 09:08:50 PM
Greywolf,

I do not know why the link I posted goes to a page not found.  It is the correct link.  Maybe the site has hot link protection or something that stops people from linking to their site.  Search yahoo for... gold leaching iodine  and read the page it should be the first result.

You could also try/test it yourself!  Split a hose into two and pump the same sediment into two seperate barrels for an hour.  Then see how much gold you get to drop with a coagulant.  Guaranteed there will be much less in the barrel that has iodine.  I know because the first time I pumped I had little to nothing that dropped with the coagulant.  I had visible gold in the oil that dropped after washing with soap but little to nothing from the coagulant.  Backtracking I noticed that there was iodine in the fish oil and called the company to see if it could be removed.  It could, I did and like magic I had gold sludge dropping when I used the coagulant.  It was the iodine disolving the invisible/suspended tiniest particles of gold.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 06, 2010, 09:49:59 PM
Where do you buy fish oil...how much a gallon is it?
What type of fish...oil ?
So when I eat Tuna...it's full of mercury  <~ShOcK~>
When I eat Salmon..same thing ...mercury.  <~ShOcK~>
Where is all of the Iodine coming from?

So...if Iodine eats gold
       and Mercury eats gold

What happens when Iodine and Mercury are together....?   <~ShOcK~>    Any Chemists on the Forum?  <-dont~know->
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 06, 2010, 10:47:04 PM
Howdy All,
Okay, I now have sometime to answer some of the questions. The first one is the patent number to Cleangold. #5,927,508. The reference to Cleangold in the Global Mercury Project is there and I'll try to get that reference for you to look up. I don't understand that some of you are not finding Cleangold information on the web. I will see if I can make a list in the future. Golly Mr. Science has it right about the economy of a system matching the situation. I have seen a lot of folks put the cart before the horse and in mining it happens a lot. Centrifuges are expensive and correct me if I'm wrong, they don't perform well in murky water. I tried one in Africa, but didn't run it enough to fully understand how efficient it was. In the near future I will be making a video showing some aspects of the Cleangold System. I would also like to say that this system is successfully being used by many miners all over the world and it is getting bigger every day. I find humor in some of you guys thinking that because the technology is fairly straight forward that all you have to do is go out and buy magnetic sheet and you got this baby nailed - this includes the transparent sheet idea on the sluice set up. The technology is only as good as the techniques that make it work as it should. Look at it this way, if someone gave you a Sluice design and how to build it, do you think you could take the Sluice down to the river and get it to perform as it should if you didn't understand the techniques to do it.? The Cleangold System is the same. As I said before, David Plath spent 15 years perfecting the techniques that make it work and work well. Don't you think he deserves to be rewarded for his hard earned efforts by buying his equipment and letting him teach you in his technology? Sometimes when I'm demonstrating the Pyramid Pro Pan at the Gold Shows I'll hear someone in the crowd say "I can build one of those myself." Perhaps they can though without me showing them the techniques, they'll never get it to work correctly even though it is fairly straight forward. If you intend to try to duplicate his system and I see that some of you already have, why should he give you his techniques so that you can deny him his due rewards? Just keep this in mind - if you try to duplicate this system and can't get it to perform the way it should, don't go crying that the system is a failure or doesn't work very well. It is you that would be the problem. All that being said, I will get some more information for you to look over, but don't be asking me for his techniques. If you want some of that, come see me at the GoldShows and buy some of his equipment, then I'll get you going in the right direction with this simple yet highly interesting technology. Cheers.

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: honeyman76 on January 07, 2010, 08:05:44 AM
I see that the Clean Gold System has a few different price ranges. Which would you suggest for the hobbiest?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 07, 2010, 01:07:38 PM
I took some of the gold I got using oil and made a short video.  It shows gold floating.  You can see just how tiny some of the particles are.

Some of the gold looks larger than it really is.  It must be due to magnification thru the bottle.  


      YouTube
            - Micron Microscopic Gold Floating
    (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig47h6c-47w)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Mr. K on January 07, 2010, 09:09:09 PM
Guys I have got to tell you I am so impressed with the level of intelligence on this forum! I thought I was kind of smart-huh. I feel very intimidated at this point. Down right dumb,
But enough of that.

Fossicker; I have looked at the cleangold sluices on your site and at a gold show a while back. From a distance I thought it was kind of like a Blue plastic mini Miller table idea. Guess I was wrong.
So with out giving away trade secrets or anything could you please explain for us dummies just what the thing is and basically how it works?
You see here in my area of the world the gold runs very fine but there seems to be a lot of it. I have looked at US prospectors S-1 finishing sluice and several other silly things but I need a method to recover fine gold from cons that does not cost me more than I could ever recover with it.
Links or Videos would help.
If not I understand and look forward to seeing you in Salem this year.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 07, 2010, 10:14:30 PM
Howdy Mr. K and All,
Yes, I'll be at the Salem Show again this year and also Roseberg, Oregon. I would be glad to give you the run down up front and personal! When I demonstrate Cleangold at the shows, I give you just a taste of what's it all about right in front of you. If you liked what you saw and buy in, then I give you directions on how to recover the gold in a easy manner. As you work with the system yourself and get the feel of using new equipment, you can ask questions to us if needed and we'll take you as far as you need to go. Most of the Cleangold Sluices I show are for the Recreational Folks and Semi Serious crowd, but I can provide you with the more serious side of mining if needed. One fact I find rather strange is that we sell to a lot of Serious miners, yet the Recreational miners seem more hesitant about jumping into this new approach to an old problem. I just don't know anything out there that is as inexpensive as Cleangold yet works so well. It has even out performed a Centrifugal in a test. Read: Global Mercury Project - Equipment Specifications for the Demonstration Units in Sudan. pg. 3 and pg. 11. As I said before, I can't understand why no one can seem to find information about Cleangold - it's out there. In the future I may post a listing on my web site that you can go to and get this information. As far as the video, give me some time, but I'm on it. Enough said about Cleangold for now. I started this Post to talk about micro flood gold not my product, but it's been fun The fish or other types of oils used to recover gold has a history and I'm sure it has its merits in certain situations. Don't quote me, but I believe a similar process was or is being used in a famous small gold area here in the United States. Alpha Wolf and Golly Mr. Science seem up to the task of explaining this interesting process and I'm eager to learn what I can of something old yet with a new twist. Do carry on. Cheers.

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 08, 2010, 12:06:10 AM
Where do you buy fish oil...how much a gallon is it?
What type of fish...oil ?
So when I eat Tuna...it's full of mercury  <~ShOcK~>
When I eat Salmon..same thing ...mercury.  <~ShOcK~>
Where is all of the Iodine coming from?

So...if Iodine eats gold
       and Mercury eats gold

What happens when Iodine and Mercury are together....?   <~ShOcK~>    Any Chemists on the Forum?  <-dont~know->

Anybody know the answers  <-dont~know->  <-thinking-> <-hypnotized-> ^#! nerd$#@ [^Crazy!#]
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 08, 2010, 05:22:41 AM
menhaden oil  It's about $20 a gallon.  Search yahoo and you will find numerous sites selling it such as Glory Hole Menhade Oil @ Boating and Fishing Catalog - Your Online Resource for the Gear the Pros Use! (http://www.boaterscatalog.com/item--Glory-Hole-Menhade-Oil--glo_menhadenoil )
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Toppossum on January 11, 2010, 08:07:18 PM
Hello Extreme Newbie here.

I am finding the information on this thread to be exceptionally educational.  I am
new to this hobby and I have several times run across very fine gold when recreational panning,
but I had no idea how to separate it from the black sand.  Thanks for all the good information. 

Now for the $64 dollar question what would be a good set of equipment for a beginner to have
to go from shovel to final separation if he wants to keep the bank account and his wife
happy?

I am already leaning toward a Clean Gold system do to the cost.

Thanks

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 11, 2010, 11:43:01 PM
Howdy Toppossum,
If you are only getting a little fine gold from panning, it would not be practicable to spend any money on any unit. But on the other hand if you are in a place with an amount of fine gold worth gathering then by all means get a piece of equipment that can do the job. Cleangold isn't the only way to skin a cat, but so far I haven't seen any other system that can do the job it does as easy and cheaply for the average miner. If I'm wrong on this point someone please correct me. Check my web site FOSSICKERS.COM -  Gold Pan Prospectors (http://www.fossickers.com) to see some of the units if you're interested. Cheers.

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 11, 2010, 11:46:08 PM
Ya know Fossicker, we are still waiting to see some video footage of what you are yacking about.........Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 12, 2010, 09:25:24 AM
I'm still waiting to see an independent study, and quantified results.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Toppossum on January 12, 2010, 03:35:10 PM
Thanks Fossicker,

I will take a look at your site.  I have an opportunity to work several claims near Fort Steel and
Cranbrook BC this summer.  I am not sure what would be best for the type of material
found in those areas.  The claims are on Weaver Creek, the Wildhorse River, and Perry
Creek.  If there is a lot of micro gold in the area your Clean Gold system trough might be the
most economical for me.  I will have to build something this winter (high banker, trommel, etc.) to
obtain my initial concentrates.  All my experience to date has been with gold pans.

Thanks again for the information.

Toppossum
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 12, 2010, 07:53:33 PM
Howdy Willthedancer,
Stop waiting and do your homework on the Internet. Most of it is there. Cheers

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 12, 2010, 08:43:25 PM
Howdy Willthedancer,
Stop waiting and do your homework on the Internet. Most of it is there. Cheers

The Fossicker

You make some pretty large claims. I have searched the net widely, and all the studies I see have Mr Plath's name on them, which disqualifies them from being independent. So I assume that your response means that there are none.  You made the claims, and I said prove it. In house studies are just marketing  tools. Large on pushing the selling points of a particular aspect of a product, and light on hard science and quantification.

You said, now show us the numbers, as they are not widely available in the public domain. A link to a real study please.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Toppossum on January 14, 2010, 09:24:45 AM
For those still looking for the Cleangold web site, it now seems to be working. 
Check it out.

cleangold products (http://www.cleangold.com/cleangold/products.html)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 14, 2010, 10:49:59 AM
A bit of a product review, here….

Though a little off topic for the type of product debated in this thread, for what it’s worth, Dave has one of the Maverick finishing pans and when we were testing it, he found that it actually worked quite well.  Further I gifted him with the Pyramid Pro this past summer, and he found that that worked exceptionally well, in fact, he prefers that over any of the many other pans we already have. Fine gold, as visible as 20/20 two-eyes can get, was retained.  I’m certainly looking forward to any new equipment capable of economically increasing upon one’s gold recovery.

This topic of recovering the micro fine gold is most interesting, and like most others, I keep glued to the thread.  I dare to think of the actual amount of gold one would realize at the end of the season, if ‘all’ gold (as humanly possible) were recoverable from the materials processed.  As for gold thus far recovered in BC (like many others areas I’m sure), I feel we haven’t even lit the candle yet - - BC..... a gold mine yet waiting to happen.

Another interesting facet for gold harvesters, when it comes to the ultra fine, if one can effect consistent recovery of nano gold particles and retain it to that dimension, the value of that to industry (medical for one) far exceeds spot gold prices.  For it costs industry big time to reduce gold to that state.  One example being - - Nano gold balls coated in a silica, is used for injection into the blood stream, whereby it then races to tumors within the body, whereafter it is then lasered to burn out the tumor, thus completely ERADICATING the cancerous tumor.  Such technology (since 2006) has been engaged with human trials within this continent, and with irrefutable results.  Just another place in our world for gold.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 15, 2010, 10:10:05 AM
It has been suggested we hold a contest for the best piece of equipment for recovering fine gold, but I don’t really feel that’s feasible, as circumstances change from one type of deposit material to the other.  So I’m suggesting we examine the varied pieces of equipment as to how they would fair up under the various types of deposit materials.  By example, how such devices would do with loomy soils, sandy material, clay material, sandy clay material, so on and so forth.  I’m presuming in the end we will find that some processes may work better for several deposit types while another piece of equipment will work better for the other.  So I will leave the lead to those more versed in these topic areas to set forth some sort of arrangement whereby we can then examine and comment on each type of equipment under that varying soil/recovery conditions.

The floor is your space.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 11:36:17 AM
RE: Contest idea;

Some type of contest/showcase (whatever you end up calling it) will also give these talented inventors/craftsman a venue to showcase their skills/inventions ... IMO, everybody wins, especially if we can narrow down the best & most cost effective equipment for micro Gold recovery.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 11:42:41 AM
RE: Contest idea;

Also... I'm willing to chip in $100.00 from my PayPal account towards a jackpot prize for the contest/showcase... if we get a total of 25 people to chip in $100 each ... the grand prize would be $2,500.00 ... and I'd suggest splitting the prize money amongst the top 3 placers... I nominate GPEX Admin to hold/manage the prize money.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 12:15:07 PM
 <-thinking->

What determines the winner?

Speed? (quantity processed)  How much material, ect. 

Easy of use?

Cost of equipment?

There would have to be some sort of points system for each.  (plus any others)

You really can't judge by quantity of gold collected unless each started with the same amount.  Not really possible unless one person worked with each method with measured amounts.  As far as nano sized gold I think it would be hard to beat using oil.  The only problem with the oil is that you can only retain what will float.  If it doesn't float in oil it passes right thru. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 12:23:35 PM
Your correct Nick ... the winner should be determined through a combination of several factors ... it's possible the winner could be voted via the GPEX membership based upon several factors... and having the membership vote might be the fairest way of determining the winner; that way, the entire membership, and not a small group of insiders decide who the winner is... although, many details need ironing out.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 12:50:47 PM
I'd rather not see a cap on the price ... because, one of the criteria (probably a very, very big part of the decision making process for the winner) of the contest will likely be "affordability"... so making a super expensive product/machine will not likely get you first prize (or any prize); even if someone produces the most efficient machine; but it costs an arm and a leg; it wont be practical for 99% of the Placer population, and hence probably wont be very popular among contest voters.

I think another criteria of the contest would be; it has to meet legal working purposes on BC claims ... either hand equipment or machine enabled; it doesn't matter to me, as long as it's legal for BC claims.

IE: The Knelson concentrators or Gemini Tables would probably win this contest if it was just based upon volume and efficiency ... but, because they cost over $20,000 each for new machines ... they wont get any votes from me.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 12:57:45 PM
I know someone toying with the idea of making a giant Blue Bowl ... and it needs a small motor to run the water jets.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 01:41:11 PM
BTW tomcat;

Supplying lots of sand peppered with micro Gold is the easy part.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 04:31:37 PM
May I suggest that this contest shoud be by using hand made equipment only no store bought equipment, with a limit of $100. for materials.
Remember we Prospectors are a cheap bunch  ;D

I don't know about hand made or home made.  Larry was talking about fossikers two products and how good they worked.  Pretty hard to beat but I'd like to include them.  I'd like to try to beat products that work so well.  Wouldn't you?  Nothing better than beating something good. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 04:50:41 PM
I wanna take a swing at it too, with my sweetheart. It will qualify for made at home since I made it in my garage, but it will not meet the 100$ price cap. Since it is a prototype, I made it with as much surplus material as I could, so the cost is under 500 USD.

You guys may not want me in this one, as my baby probably will kick butt. 'Twer up to me I'd make it a time limit run with a comparison for volume processed, Gold retained, installation and maintenance costs, time required to pay for itself in a given situation, and ease of use. Only the ease of use would be subjective, the rest is simple math, and figures don't lie.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 04:54:36 PM
I wanna take a swing at it too, with my sweetheart. It will qualify for made at home since I made it in my garage, but it will not meet the 100$ price cap. Since it is a prototype, I made it with as much surplus material as I could, so the cost is under 500 USD.

You guys may not want me in this one, as my baby probably will kick butt. 'Twer up to me I'd make it a time limit run with a comparison for volume processed, Gold retained, installation and maintenance costs, time required to pay for itself in a given situation, and ease of use. Only the ease of use would be subjective, the rest is simple math, and figures don't lie.

I'm all for allowing willthedancer in anyone else? 

Will I think someone said something about set or the same amount of material for everyone. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 04:57:25 PM
I want a time limit run, no quantity limit.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 05:03:28 PM
I'm all for allowing ANYBODY into the contest ... which would include willthedancer, or anyone else... becuase, as I mentioned before, the mega-dollar machines wouldn't get my vote anyways ... some of the things important to me when casting my vote will be;

* low cost,
* decent production (doesn't have to be the highest volume machine),
* low maintenance,
* easy transportability,
* easy to operate.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 15, 2010, 05:04:42 PM
Don’t know if you’re biting off more than can be chewed Bill_Carson, as it seems that it would be hard to evaluate the varied apparatus’ unless all of them were tested under the exacting same conditions, with the same ore matter and the exact same amounts.  Unless of course, someone would take the same mix around to all contestants (the same gravel/soil and the gold). With the recovery being measured by the same independent observer.  It will surely take a bit of head-work to get it set up properly, so being as this idea is your puppy, you’re elected.

Per the mention of the pans Dave found good for recovery, I think any such contest ought to be targeting equipment that is capable of working larger volumes of ground, thus, excluding hand-held equipment.  Just my thoughts.

If you get it set up where it would be fair and equal, I’ll toss in my $100
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 05:08:12 PM
Will,

You mean a time limit like 10 minutes?  That would probably knock fossicker out.

Or how much material you can process in XX amount of time?  That would knock fossicker out.

We'll all have to come to a happy medium or just make it everything goes.  After all, there are many methods and each has their strong point.  Each method could be judged on it's own merits.  

Suggestions?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 05:11:50 PM
How about buckets of classed aggregate, as many as you can take from the same central spot, and put through your concentrator for 2 hours. Everybody gets the same stuff to process. The contestant must do any necessary final classification to get it ready for their device. At the end of the 2 hours, count the buckets for each contestant, and see what they recovered by having the judge pan the cons. Then the results could be put through the math.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 05:15:14 PM
Will,

You mean a time limit like 10 minutes?  That would probably knock fossicker out.

Or how much material you can process in XX amount of time?  That would knock fossicker out.

We'll all have to come to a happy medium or just make it everything goes.  After all, there are many methods and each has their strong point.  Each method could be judged on it's own merits.  

Suggestions?

I certainly woud not like to exclude anyone in this contest. 2 hours of run time ought to give a fair idea.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 15, 2010, 05:18:36 PM
If testing the same ground, I think the rate (speed) ought to be a factor too.  Say two are equal in recovery ability, but how long it takes would be of definite concern by the miner in the field. Is the objective not to ascertain which type of equipment would prove best for the placer miner working in the field?  As in, how much he could recover within a certain time frame, as well as size of gold recoverable.  I wonder if voting would be as fair as measuring the results by the various criteria - - with all things being equal.  ???
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 05:25:31 PM
How about buckets of classed aggregate, as many as you can take from the same central spot, and put through your concentrator for 2 hours. Everybody gets the same stuff to process. The contestant must do any necessary final classification to get it ready for their device. At the end of the 2 hours, count the buckets for each contestant, and see what they recovered by having the judge pan the cons. Then the results could be put through the math.

I'm in NJ and have no location for gold to work.  I was planning on using my two bucket method.  Two buckets plus a cost of about $2 and 5 minutes to make.  I'd have to bring out the big guns!  Doing volume with the big guns in a two hour period wouldn't be fair to most I'd have no chance to lose.   ;)
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 05:26:30 PM
Larry, thats why i said count the buckets at the end of the 2 hours. Then you know what was pushed through the device within the time limit.  As to classing, how about preclassed to 1". I would end up classing to 1/4 at that point, and would not want to be given any unfair advantage that way. No one I have seen here will be able to keep up as it is, not and hold anything. The longer the run, the better the test will be, but attention span for observers is a limiting factor. Most guys will be willing to sit through a couple of hours.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 05:34:02 PM
How about buckets of classed aggregate, as many as you can take from the same central spot, and put through your concentrator for 2 hours. Everybody gets the same stuff to process. The contestant must do any necessary final classification to get it ready for their device. At the end of the 2 hours, count the buckets for each contestant, and see what they recovered by having the judge pan the cons. Then the results could be put through the math.

I'm in NJ and have no location for gold to work.  I was planning on using my two bucket method.  Two buckets plus a cost of about $2 and 5 minutes to make.  I'd have to bring out the big guns!  Doing volume with the big guns in a two hour period wouldn't be fair to most I'd have no chance to lose.   ;)

I proposed to make this a test of cost benefit anaysis. Material moved in a set time is a factor, but so are the installation and maintenance costs, and especially the time required to have the device pay for itself. I might not even be in the running for best of show here, as a gold pan is 2 orders of magnitude less expensive, but 2 orders less material moves with it as well. Who knows???
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 15, 2010, 05:35:45 PM
On second thought, I suppose hand held equipment should also be in this contest... though they may be at a disadvantage when it comes to volume.  Is the objective not to determine which would be the best type of equipment for the varied types of applications.... and that which would deliver the better returns during normal work applications.  Personally, I can see that a certain type of equipment might be good for s certain type of ore matter, where it may not fair out the best for another. ????????
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 05:41:16 PM
>>>> On second thought, I suppose hand held equipment should also be in this contest <<<<<

Yes, the contest should be open to all equipment ... who knows, somebody might make a large kick-a$$ high volume hand operated Miller Table for under $300, that, for the price, blows everything else out of the water.

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 05:43:14 PM
>>>>> 2 hours of run time ought to give a fair idea. <<<<<<

The 2 hours should include the set-up time as well, IMO.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 05:44:12 PM
It's a tough call.  My opinion...

Anything goes!  The people voting can view videos and decide.  I'm assuming that they will vote fairly and base their decisions on all factors.  Cost, speed, volume, originality, setup effectivness, work involved, time and effort ect.  Vote for what they would use and/or want and/or be able to afford.

It's a tough call!
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 05:45:21 PM
On second thought, I suppose hand held equipment should also be in this contest... though they may be at a disadvantage when it comes to volume.  Is the objective not to determine which would be the best type of equipment for the varied types of applications.... and that which would deliver the better returns during normal work applications.  Personally, I can see that a certain type of equipment might be good for s certain type of ore matter, where it may not fair out the best for another. ????????

I am pleased to let the rest of you to decide what the aggregate should be. I do not care. I would only ask that the gold be fairly small, since this thread is about micro flood gold. Give me black sand,  sand bar agg, whatever. This thread is about what you find on a sandbar in a waterway.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 05:46:06 PM
>>>>> Vote for what they would use and/or want and/or be able to afford. <<<<<<

Thats along the lines of what I was thinking.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 05:48:00 PM
To be fair, this needs to happen in person, all together on the same playing field, with the impartial judge panning the cons to see what comes of it. i would be pleased to drive up to BC to do it.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 05:49:11 PM
>>>>> This thread is about what you find on a sandbar in a waterway. <<<<<

Thats basically what the contest was originally envisioned upon.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 15, 2010, 05:50:59 PM
There is a distance between bank run and final gold in hand.
One piece of equipment might move way more material but have a lower recovery rate. Actual gold recovered in a certain time would not be a good measure otherwise a Ross Box moving 300 cubic yards per hour could win.
I know that is an exageration of scale from what we are talking but I use it to illustrate my point.
I would like to see some way to address the whole picture.
That would need to account for volume per time versus recovery percentage versus amount of work to get to final gold.
For instance - a jig might have excellent recovery but leave you with a ton of cons to process to get to the gold while a centrifuge might recover as well or better but only have 20 kg of cons to process for the gold recovered.
A sluice might have a lower percentage recovery rate but the concentration ratio and the advantage that brings to the gold recovery process downstream might drag it back into contention.
It brings to a head the whole process. A small miner might consider a jig in his operation only to find that the massive amounts of cons to deal with force him to consider a significant investment in gold seperation technology.
I don't have a unifying theory yet and I am just waving my arms around but I would like to see the whole process as part of the equation.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 06:03:03 PM
I am sure that we can come up with an equitable formula to judge the contest by. There is a certain amount of annoyance value to be noted if the judge is stuck panning a whole bucket of quasi-cons. I did not want to make this a panning contest, so I suggested that the judge do it. That will make it consistent as well. It may also be put into the formula as a concentration ratio.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 15, 2010, 06:05:04 PM
>>>> One piece of equipment might move way more material but have a lower recovery rate <<<<<


Bear in mind that most of the true sand bars along the Fraser already consist of mostly just fine sand ... if someone could reverse-engineer a gemini table for under $1,000 ...  a guy would almost  be able to just clean their sand, and puts runs of classified -30, -50 and -100 sand in, and come out without needing a huge con clean up.

Machines requiring a huge con clean up might be at a potential disadvantage on a true sand bar vs. machines that can process lots of sand and separate most of the micro gold from the sand at the same time, without needing a lengthy clean up.

The clean-up process should be part of the contest run time, IMO.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 06:07:22 PM
>>>> One piece of equipment might move way more material but have a lower recovery rate <<<<<


Bear in mind that most of the true sand bars along the Fraser already consist of mostly just fine sand ... if someone could reverse-engineer a gemini table for under $1,000 ...  a guy would almost  be able to just clean their sand, and puts runs of classified -30, -50 and -100 sand in, and come out without needing a huge con clean up.

Machines requiring a huge con clean up might be at a potential disadvantage on a true sand bar vs. machines that can process lots of sand and separate the micro gold from the sand at the same time, without needing a lengthy clean up.

The clean-up process should be part of the contest run time, IMO.

Yes, I agree totally. At the end of the time limit you put your cons on the table for the judge.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 06:08:36 PM
Gollymrscience,  Thats why I say anything goes and let the voters decide.

Willthedancer, I can't get to BC but I can use a pre measured amount of gold mixed into any amount of soil to see how fast and how much gold is recovered.  Like a gram in 5 or 10 buckets of unclassified soil.  See how fast I can process a ton and see how much of the gram I get back.  

Two hours is too long for me.  There is no gold that I can get to here in NJ.  I'd need dump trucks full of soil to run for two hours.  
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 06:13:35 PM
Gollymrscience,  Thats why I say anything goes and let the voters decide.

Willthedancer, I can't get to BC but I can use a pre measured amount of gold mixed into any amount of soil to see how fast and how much gold is recovered.  Like a gram in 5 or 10 buckets of unclassified soil.  See how fast I can process a ton and see how much of the gram I get back.  

Two hours is too long for me.  There is no gold that I can get to here in NJ.  I'd need dump trucks full of soil to run for two hours.  


You I would trust perhaps, but this needs to happen in person. What is to keep the unscrupulous from salting their pan, or editing their run time, or any other manner of chicanery. Think of some of the gold panning tv shows you have seen......
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 06:16:35 PM
Definitely on continuous uninterupted video.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 06:19:44 PM
Definitely on continuous uninterupted video.

The other issue with that is the fact that everyone needs to run the same material to have a fair test.

Independent studies require a chain of custody for all materials involved. No less here.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 06:29:17 PM
Who's going to send me material and how much can they possibly send?  5 gallon bucket?  Using NJ soil there is no gold except for whatever pre-measured amount.  

Using anything from gold bearing areas there could be a lot of gold, a little gold or no gold.  There could be a lot of gold and nothing recovered.  There could be a little gold with all recovered.  There is no real way to see how effective any one process is without a pre-measured amount.  

What kind of material sand, dirt, clay, rocks, pebbles, classified, not classified, ect doesn't matter to me.  I'll do it all!

This is why I think anything goes is the way to go.  The voters will decide.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 06:43:20 PM
I'll let the judges determine if video is to be acceptable evidence for the contest, and if so, whether it is adequate. I have said my piece about it. I want it to be fair, and am willing to pay an entry fee to play.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 06:50:48 PM
There are people here from all over the world who may want to show their stuff.  Personally I don't want anyone to be shut out for any reason.  Anything goes!  Make rules for video submissions.  Continuous, show pre-measured amounts being weighed and dumped, ect.  If you are classifying, then classify on video.  Whatever the process is from beginning to end, the whole ball of wax on continuous video. 

I'll use a bag of rocks, a bag of pebbles, a bag of quick dry cement, a bucket full of dirt dug from the yard and a gram of gold weighed and dumped all on continuous video.  Then see how much I can recover and how quickly I can recover it. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 06:57:27 PM
There are people here from all over the world who may want to show their stuff.  Personally I don't want anyone to be shut out for any reason.  Anything goes!  Make rules for video submissions.  Continuous, show pre-measured amounts being weighed and dumped, ect.  If you are classifying, then classify on video.  Whatever the process is from beginning to end, the whole ball of wax on continuous video. 

I'll use a bag of rocks, a bag of pebbles, a bag of quick dry cement, a bucket full of dirt dug from the yard and a gram of gold weighed and dumped all on continuous video.  Then see how much I can recover and how quickly I can recover it. 

The quality of the aggregate is a tough thing to reproduce. I would guess that the material in your neck of the woods is likely continental stuff, and pretty light, whereas the stuff there in BC is varied, and likely detritus from lots of places, many of them ultramafic, and hence very heavy. You would have an advantage. The other part of this is the (yet not agreed apon) 2 hour run as the test. Can you come up with 2 hours worth of agg to run, and have it be consistent with the stuff being run out west?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 07:05:50 PM
What I have right here is mostly clay and loam. 

I've been testing at 30 gallons a minute and plan on getting a larger pump as I think I can run at about 100 gallons a minute with the current setup but until I get the pump I won't know for sure.  I'm sucking unclassified right out of a large container.  There is a classifying screen at the intake so I do not need to pre-classify. 

Figure 100 gallons a minute 50/50 water/unclassified material.  How much material would I need?  A whole lot to run for 2 hours.

I do live on a muddy creek.  I can dump a gram of gold into the muck but that would still not take much time to get it back.  I'd have to leave the thing running for the remainder of the two hours for nothing. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 07:05:58 PM
Let me add please, that I want to see everybody's  best effort, and do not want to miss any. The more, the better for all. Tricks to be learned and shared, that we all will profit by.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GollyMrScience on January 15, 2010, 07:08:38 PM
This is going to degenerate into an impossible task. Getting the same material, the same gold sizes and purity and weight, getting the same percentages of black sand, the same efficiency of final recovery etc etc.
I have done quite a few of these tests and while I can offer some suggestions its gonna get tough to do with far flung and highly variable equipment and operating conditions.
Each inventor or innovator will want to ensure that their equipment is optimized for a test and run under optimal conditions.
Black sands HAVE to be part of the test as we cannot all run clean silica sand with placer gold when in the field.
More arm waving still I am afraid but I hope that it helps give us some direction.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 15, 2010, 07:18:50 PM
A local test will fix this, as the material from the same bar will be similar enough. Part of what I proposed back there a while was that the material is classed into buckets from the same location, sitting in a central location, run what you can and put the cons on the judges table in 2 hours. This would require that you can get your equipment to the location. That would probably wash out folks with 100 ton/hour washplants...
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 15, 2010, 07:23:04 PM
This is going to degenerate into an impossible task. Getting the same material, the same gold sizes and purity and weight, getting the same percentages of black sand, the same efficiency of final recovery etc etc.
I have done quite a few of these tests and while I can offer some suggestions its gonna get tough to do with far flung and highly variable equipment and operating conditions.
Each inventor or innovator will want to ensure that their equipment is optimized for a test and run under optimal conditions.
Black sands HAVE to be part of the test as we cannot all run clean silica sand with placer gold when in the field.
More arm waving still I am afraid but I hope that it helps give us some direction.

I agree with this is going to degenerate into an impossible task.  That is the reason I say anything goes.   

(my opinion)  Your whole process from beginning to end. Any one piece of equipment or any method can be used in any location under any conditions by anyone.  If you need to classify then that is part of your process and you have to do it.  What I will use needs classified materials as does a centrifuge but my equipment classifies at the nozzel.  It's part of the equipment.  I don't need to pre-classify manually.  If you want to compare equipment, methods, efficiency, recovery, easy of use, cost, ect. your whole process from beginning to end is what counts along with all other considerations. 

You should not work by a standard that does not cover all possibilities that can be encountered or suits a method or piece of equipment.  One method may work with sand.  One with gravels.  One with clay, ect, ect, ect. 

  Someone else please make the rules and then I'll decide if or what I will use to compete.  It's really not right for competitors in a competition to make the rules. Those of you who will not compete you should make the rules.     

 100 gallons per minute 50/50 water/material = 12,000 gallons in two hours...  50% material = 6,000 gallons of materials divided by 5 = 1200 5 gallon buckets of material in two hours
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 15, 2010, 08:17:35 PM
 [email protected]* [email protected]* [email protected]* With all due respect - YOU'RE ALL INSANE!!  [email protected]* [email protected]* [email protected]* This contest idea, though plausible, would just be too complicated to be run on a Forum situation. Just to qualify the perimeters is a chore. Keep in mind that just to qualify the action of Sluice Boxes was quite an undertaking for Randy Clarkson who discussed this problem in his extensive reports. I must give sympathy to him, as just to develop my Pyramid Pro Pan, the control factor I needed to do in the testing phase of development was a considerable problem. (It took 5 years and 6 proto-types to nail it.) Keep in mind now that we're talking about just 1 device, not several others. And to make it worse, we're are talking about judging different devices that have different approaches. All systems have a  + or - to some degree. (Except mine of course.)  ;D ;D Seriously, we can nit-pick this forever so it would probably make more sense if we can make up a chart much like the one used when you want to buy a Metal Detector. List out the preferred features wanted in a piece of equipment for the area of interest, use, ease, efficiency, cost and so on....... One perimeter that would have to be addressed is are we talking recreational or commercial endeavours or both? Anyway I think I'll lay down and take a few Aspirins. Before I do, here are some reachable reports that can be read or downloaded without having to pay a high fee for a Science Paper on the Cleangold subject from Peers in the field:

artminers.org/artminers/peru_cleangold report.html

global mercury project: equipment specificationsfor the demonstration units in sudan

Sluice Mat (http://elvahost.com/~vcatbe/prospecting/sluicemat.html)

Marcello M. Veiga, Associate Professor of University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, Reducing/Replacing Mercury in ASM Operations (http://www.slideshare.net/EPetrilli/veiga-replacing-hg-in-asm-operations-presentation)

www.globalmercuryproject.org/countries/venezuela-from%20dynamics%20hg%20pollution.pdf

As I said, these are the ones that don't cost money to review. In some of these reports there are some very informative pieces of information if you know what you're looking at.  Another interesting piece of information is that much of the research is from the BC University - Marcello Veiga, Global Mercury Report. There are also other Peer reports from other places as well, but they cost money to look at these reports. Bottom line is that for the money and ease of handling fine and micro gold, Clean gold Systems are right up there with most systems that are available and is right now being used successfully all over the world. Do the homework. Cheers.

The Fossicker
  
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 15, 2010, 08:49:57 PM
Yes we know we're insane, keeps things interesting wouldn't you say, still a while to spring gotta do somethin <-laugh-> <-laugh-> ;D.....Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 16, 2010, 12:00:46 AM
Seems the deeper this gets the more I fall back to that which I originally suggested, in that I don’t overly feel this proposed competition could be a feasible thing.  There’s just too many variables to attempt to fit into one equation.  It is just far too complicated.  And in the end I don’t think any piece of equipment would capture a fair shake.  The thread now, is almost reciprocating back and forth in an atmosphere of competitive product advertising.  Taking all factors into consideration, it would be my proposal we simply fall back to the original platform of examining the different types of recovery systems and how they work best under varied applications.  As said, what may be optimum for one project may not necessarily be so for another.  The reward would be (for all) a better understanding what the various types of recovery systems are capable of delivering and our options on possibly how to better tailor them to accommodate our own specific projects.

Being as the matter of the topic has strayed so far off base, in a sense, I'd like to hear other's opinions......
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: sluicedog on January 16, 2010, 01:44:27 AM
In my opinion...a total waste of energy.
It could never be worked out  :o
Too many variables,,,,lets move on to more constructive things  ^#!
Or...let me know when you are done with this and I might come back to the Forum.
Read your history...prospectors don't share jack squatt.....why?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 16, 2010, 06:11:47 AM

I'm out of this competition.  It's way to complicated and I really don't want my stuff out in public just yet.   
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 16, 2010, 09:24:27 AM
Mr. Bill Carson and others - -

........ might we seek the general consensus toward abandoning the aspect of an equipment contest.  In all essence, it clearly appears we are going down a dead end road, as it would be impossible to duplicate circumstances for the varied equipment, and in being fair to all, from all across the globe.  Good merit, just not workable.  The only way in which it could work is for each contestant to submit one of their recovery units for independent evaluation by the same unbiased individual.  Only that way could all conditions and ore materials then be duplicated.

It would be my contention that we get back to the original context of micro fine gold recovery, and if others so agree, being as Dave is not here to help me, I will attempt to divide this thread, leaving the micro recovery posts in the original thread while creating a new topic and moving these ‘contest’ posts into such a thread all of its own.  I would really like to hear your opinions before taking such measures upon myself..... primarily from those who have already posted responses here.

Comments, please?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 16, 2010, 09:27:34 AM
Hi Larry,

What might be a more PRACTICAL approach than a contest may be a series of micro Gold equipment profiles ... as a rough idea, this concept could be done along the lines as to how the automotive industry tests new vehicle models each year, or how "consumer reports" magazine tests products and unbiasedly reports the results.

The profiles/tests could be restricted to machines which are clearly designed to specialize in micro gold recovery (so we dont waste our times).

Using a "profile", "road test", or "consumer reports" type approach would also take the pressure off of adhering to a tighter schedule ... the inventors can bring their machines forward when they are ready, as opposed to being rushed to meet deadlines.

IE: Consumer Reports: Expert product reviews and product Ratings from our test labs (http://www.consumerreports.org)

(http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/resources/rd07/images/headback_left.gif)

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 16, 2010, 10:08:13 AM
Quote
What might be a more PRACTICAL approach than a contest may be a series of micro Gold equipment profiles ... as a rough idea, this concept could be done along the lines as to how the automotive industry tests new vehicle models each year, or how "consumer reports" magazine tests products and unbiasedly reports the results.

The profiles/tests could be restricted to machines which are clearly designed to specialize in micro gold recovery (so we dont waste our times).

Using a "profile", "road test", or "consumer reports" type approach would also take the pressure off of adhering to a tighter schedule ... the inventors can bring their machines forward when they are ready, as opposed to being rushed to meet deadlines.

That sounds a bit more feasible.  And it would work well for all other types of mining related equipment, apparatuses and processes.  All under the same parent roof but broken down into the varied classifications, depending on the type of equipment evaluated.  So be it, the “Placer Miners Reports” is now born.  From there we can build.  I have just now secured the .com and .ca domains for such.  When Dave returns to the airways, I’ll see if he can set this up accordingly.

Great Idea !!   {-applause-}  [-1st-]
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 16, 2010, 10:14:16 AM
Now - - tell me guys and gals, being as all this contest chatter has somewhat consumed or otherwise high jacked this ever-so-important micro gold thread, would you feel comfortable if I simply did away with the “contest-related posts” so as to realign the thread accordingly?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 16, 2010, 10:14:54 AM
My opinion...

Skip the contest.

Anyone interested can do a "Show and Tell" or "Showcase" type thing showing features, efficiency, costs, ease of use, ect.  Sort of like an online trade show of methods, equipment, ect.  At some later date (scheduled date or not) someone with authority such as Larry can make a poll listing each item and let the members decide what they like best.  No prize!
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 16, 2010, 10:16:20 AM
Now - - tell me guys and gals, being as all this contest chatter has somewhat consumed or otherwise high jacked this ever-so-important micro gold thread, would you feel comfortable if I simply did away with the “contest-related posts” so as to be realign the thread accordingly?

Sounds good to me.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on January 16, 2010, 10:20:13 AM
You can cut my contest posts... since we're going in a different direction now.

Maybe keep them up for another 2 - 3 days ... just so whoever is gone for the weekend, can get caught up on Monday, and not be confused as to why we are going in a different direction.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 16, 2010, 10:32:24 AM
Quote
Maybe keep them up for another 2 - 3 days ... just so whoever is gone for the weekend, can get caught up on Monday, and not be confused as to why we are going in a different direction.

Good idea !

And.......

For this, I envision submissions from individuals (who have fabricated or otherwise had fabricated, or purchased same - - or are using same) which would include a write-up along with photos and videos, which should go on to describe the type of ore used, highlights on the intricate features, all operating procedures and results.  And eventually, testimonials from unbiased persons.  This sound consistent with the intended direction - - any opposing views?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: willthedancer on January 16, 2010, 03:28:30 PM
Go ahead and pull mine too. I'm done talking.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: oldprospector2 on January 17, 2010, 12:19:06 AM
Go ahead and pull mine too. I'm done talking.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: The Fossicker on January 17, 2010, 10:11:59 PM
Howdy All,
Just got back from Drift Mining and lots of panning in blue clay mush (if you know what I mean,) looking for signs of direction on the ancient river bed of the area. A Products Page would be interesting if it's set up properly. As far as testing the validity of the claims - I have to think on that one. Accompanying testimonials is nice, but I find it hard to get them in writing myself. In fact most folks phone me up and tell me how much they like my whatever, but few of them will post to my web site, even when I ask them too. Another consideration is what constatutes the type of articles we are calling products. In a broadband situation we would have to review the latest Trackhoe, Rubber Boats, etc. In the Narrowband situation, we would keep the products to only the Recreational Miner as an example. Yet another consideration is the integrity of this very Forum. I believe that if we go with some form of Products Page that the information isn't a competitive hot air competition fight, but rather unbiased results that help to guide folks in their decision making without the hype. And oh yes, I do believe that this subject has nothing to do with our original subject "Micro Gold" so if you want to post these threads somewhere else, then I whole heartily agree. Cheers.

The Fossicker
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: pickaxe on January 22, 2010, 03:17:00 PM
Hello, Ladies and gentlemen. lol New to the forum here, but I can already see it will be a regular stopping place. Thanks for sharing your valuable info.

I wanted to reply briefly to the Cleangold question. No, i don't have any personal experience. Not with the product, anyway. The reason you can not find ANY info on the Cleangold products in American literurature is because Mr. Plath threatens to sue forum owners if his people find a discussion about the product. Three forum owners, at least, have been threatened with lawsuits if a discussion like has been going on here persisted. It's amazing to me this has been allowed to be talked about thus far here without the owner being contacted by Mr. Plaths lawyers.
Perhaps it's because his salesman is here, working. I know this is the truth as I was personally shushed by PM and a thread DELETED by a forum owner, not long ago.

I think Mr. Plath is not looking at the long picture on his product, looking at the maybe 20 folks who would build their own, instead of the many, many who might buy his products here in North America. I believe his Cleangold products rate our study if Mr. Plath would relax a bit and allow discussion. The thing with Third World folk is he has a "captive" audience. Its Merc, or his product. And very few of those people would have the rescources to copy his design. And I believe he has a foot in the door with the World Health Org. I say, Good for him, those peoples working with Mercury rate a chance at a healthy life through his products. But don't cut us North American miners out, because some of us are do-it-yourselfrs. We like a quality product too.  


My .02,       pickaxe


P.S. I want to add that I did not mean to give the impression that the deleted thread mentioned above was on this forum. It was not. My apologies.




 

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 23, 2010, 07:01:52 PM

I wanted to reply briefly to the Cleangold question. No, i don't have any personal experience. Not with the product, anyway. The reason you can not find ANY info on the Cleangold products in American literurature is because Mr. Plath threatens to sue forum owners if his people find a discussion about the product.
 
Perhaps it's because his salesman is here, working. I know this is the truth as I was personally shushed by PM and a thread DELETED by a forum owner, not long ago.

I think Mr. Plath is not looking at the long picture on his product, looking at the maybe 20 folks who would build their own, instead of the many, many who might buy his products here in North America. I believe his Cleangold products rate our study if Mr. Plath would relax a bit and allow discussion. The thing with Third World folk is he has a "captive" audience. Its Merc, or his product. And very few of those people would have the rescources to copy his design. And I believe he has a foot in the door with the World Health Org. I say, Good for him, those peoples working with Mercury rate a chance at a healthy life through his products. But don't cut us North American miners out, because some of us are do-it-yourselfrs. We like a quality product too.   


My .02,       pickaxe



pickaxe,
I've noticed quite a few people here have asked for information and videos of the cleangold system.  The person selling has yet to give any information other than links to studies written by Plath.  Doesn't make me interested in the product.  I would not spend hundreds of dollars to buy the product just to get answers (or should I say find out for myself) to simple questions that should be answered by those who sell the product.

I really don't get the mercury thing?  Just about any product made for prospectors does not require mercury.  So what makes the cleangold product different?  How does it eliminate the need for mercury? 

From what I've seen of the cost to buy cleangold these same people could buy many other products.  Maybe it's one of those "Grants" companies get from the Government. 

The one video I did see that used cleangold showed someone scrapping black sands off of the surface of cleangold.  I gather that the magnetic sign material holds black sands that hold gold.  It doesn't seem practical as from what I saw you would have to continually scrape the black sands off or they would build up rather quickly.  Then what?  You capture the gold from the black sands with mercury?  How would they seperate the gold from the black sands? 

It may be ok for someone who doesn't care about continually stopping (or operating at a slow pace) to wipe off the sands but I don't see it as being practical in a commercial operation. 

Getting mercury out of the enviroment is a good thing.  Show ways to get micron gold without using mercury is also a good thing.  I'm going to contact the organizations and show them how to get micron sized gold without mercury (and without black sands) using two buckets and a stick. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Guest on January 23, 2010, 10:21:02 PM
Now on this ocassion I find that I will whole heartily agree with NICKMARCH what is up with the CLEANGOLD SYSTEM, now from what I 've been able to see there isn't all thatr much diffferent from the GOUGHTA TABLE though I could be wrong and at times are asssumed toi be .............Guest
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 24, 2010, 12:55:43 AM

For the life of me I cannot figure out Why and How things drift so far off topic, and so quickly after hardly getting things back on track.

The topic as I recall, is on Micro Flood Gold, and the varied means for recovering same.  In other words, identifying a certain piece or type of equipment and through using it or testing what it will do, by either the person responsible for producing it or someone who has used it, reporting on its results. This is NOT, and I repeat, is not, an open gate for once again targeting an individual or a recovery system before whomever has had a chance to offer it into consideration.

And again, this is not a contest between makers.... (I felt I was quite clear on that) it is a testing and evaluation of products and methods.  In other words, per the CleanGold System, if the individual doesn’t wish to bring his product forward, or someone having used same doesn’t report on its performance, then simply “leave it alone.”  It just doesn’t make it into the consideration list.  And no comment ought to then be made against it unless either of the two criteria applies.  And under no circumstances should there be a personal attack. None.... unless a complainant can substantiate a fraudulent or misleading action has taken place.  The same applies for the two-bucket system, if it’s not going to be brought forward, then enough talk about that too.... it also is then eliminated from consideration.  There’s no legitimacy in a claim or counter claim whatsoever, unless a product is indeed used or tested by the individual making such statement.  Idle allegations will not do.

P  L  E  A  S  E  !!  Fossicker started a most interesting thread, quit obliterating it.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 24, 2010, 08:13:59 AM
 I went back and read the first post in this thread.  The only question was...

How about let's hearing from others who have some experience chasing small micro gold and trying to find where it likes to hide. Any tips??



 Practically every article that I've read says that micron gold is found on the inside bend of turns in waterways.  Places where the water is calm.


The second post was...


Hello Fossicker
What equipment would you use to recover micro fine gold?

 I didn't find that Fossicker answered. 


Then we were all called insane with some links to reports about cleangold...


[email protected]* [email protected]* [email protected]* With all due respect - YOU'RE ALL INSANE!!  [email protected]* [email protected]* [email protected]* Before I do, here are some reachable reports that can be read or downloaded without having to pay a high fee for a Science Paper on the Cleangold subject from Peers in the field:

artminers.org/artminers/peru_cleangold report.html

global mercury project: equipment specificationsfor the demonstration units in sudan

Sluice Mat (http://elvahost.com/~vcatbe/prospecting/sluicemat.html)

Marcello M. Veiga, Associate Professor of University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, Reducing/Replacing Mercury in ASM Operations (http://www.slideshare.net/EPetrilli/veiga-replacing-hg-in-asm-operations-presentation)

www.globalmercuryproject.org/countries/venezuela-from%20dynamics%20hg%20pollution.pdf

In some of these reports there are some very informative pieces of information if you know what you're looking at....   

Cheers.

The Fossicker
 

 Larry posted...


For the life of me I cannot figure out Why and How things drift so far off topic, and so quickly after hardly getting things back on track.

The topic as I recall, is on Micro Flood Gold, and the varied means for recovering same.  In other words, identifying a certain piece or type of equipment and through using it or testing what it will do, by either the person responsible for producing it or someone who has used it, reporting on its results. This is NOT, and I repeat, is not, an open gate for once again targeting an individual or a recovery system before whomever has had a chance to offer it into consideration.

And again, this is not a contest between makers.... (I felt I was quite clear on that) it is a testing and evaluation of products and methods.  In other words, per the CleanGold System, if the individual doesn’t wish to bring his product forward, or someone having used same doesn’t report on its performance, then simply “leave it alone.”  It just doesn’t make it into the consideration list.  And no comment ought to then be made against it unless either of the two criteria applies.  And under no circumstances should there be a personal attack. None.... unless a complainant can substantiate a fraudulent or misleading action has taken place.  The same applies for the two-bucket system, if it’s not going to be brought forward, then enough talk about that too.... it also is then eliminated from consideration.  There’s no legitimacy in a claim or counter claim whatsoever, unless a product is indeed used or tested by the individual making such statement.  Idle allegations will not do.

P  L  E  A  S  E  !!  Fossicker started a most interesting thread, quit obliterating it.



 Fossicker posted links to articles that contained information about cleangold.  Cleangold is a piece of equipment used specifically for micron gold.  That struck me as bringing forward and including the product in the discussion.  If someone includes a piece of equipment and then fails to answer any questions then (as I stated in my post) We would have to buy the product just to get answers.  Being that I won't buy it to get answers I read the articles from the posted links about cleangold and other articles on the same sites and found an article that says...

   "Gold becomes trapped in a magnetite layer which can be easily scrapped and washed into a pan. Using a magnet, the magnetite is removed"

and

"However, as the magnetic separation isn’t always 100% efficient, and the concentrate tailings
can carry some gold, so amalgamation or even leaching of the concentrates is recommended"  [/b]

 I had no choice but to get answers from the articles and what I observed from a video that was posted in this forum.  To post links to sites who's mission is to cut or eliminate the use of mercury thereby implying cleangold as a solution is fraudulent and misleading being that the use of mercury is a "recommended" part of the cleangold process.  The use of magnetics is something that Fossicker criticized in another thread.  Being that the cleangold system uses magnets to seperate gold from black sands and is part of the cleangold system I find it misleading to criticize the use of magnets.   

The two bucket method is something that I will show as soon as I can get a patent pending issued on something else.  That will hopefully be within ten days.  If anyone has any questions I'll answer them as long as the question wasn't answered in the video.  If anyone has any criticism of the method but hasn't tried it, I'll ask them to try it for themself.  It won't cost them hundreds of dollars.  It will cost them a bucket being that a hole has to be drilled into the bucket and about 50 cents.  If they still choose to criticize then so be it!  Pro's and cons are what make a discussion.     

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: honeyman76 on January 24, 2010, 08:46:05 AM

For the life of me I cannot figure out Why and How things drift so far off topic, and so quickly after hardly getting things back on track.

The topic as I recall, is on Micro Flood Gold, and the varied means for recovering same.  In other words, identifying a certain piece or type of equipment and through using it or testing what it will do, by either the person responsible for producing it or someone who has used it, reporting on its results. This is NOT, and I repeat, is not, an open gate for once again targeting an individual or a recovery system before whomever has had a chance to offer it into consideration.

And again, this is not a contest between makers.... (I felt I was quite clear on that) it is a testing and evaluation of products and methods.  In other words, per the CleanGold System, if the individual doesn’t wish to bring his product forward, or someone having used same doesn’t report on its performance, then simply “leave it alone.”  It just doesn’t make it into the consideration list.  And no comment ought to then be made against it unless either of the two criteria applies.  And under no circumstances should there be a personal attack. None.... unless a complainant can substantiate a fraudulent or misleading action has taken place.  The same applies for the two-bucket system, if it’s not going to be brought forward, then enough talk about that too.... it also is then eliminated from consideration.  There’s no legitimacy in a claim or counter claim whatsoever, unless a product is indeed used or tested by the individual making such statement.  Idle allegations will not do.

P  L  E  A  S  E  !!  Fossicker started a most interesting thread, quit obliterating it.


For what my thoughts are worth, I have to agree with GPEX. Lets see facts and not speculation. Innocent until proven guilty. Lets see some hard data
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: elgreba on January 24, 2010, 08:46:45 AM
Hey there! I`ve think Gold Spear is a perfect tool for that job.. Finding small micro and black sand..

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 24, 2010, 08:50:41 AM
OKAY........ NickMarch, hmmm....didn't quite expect all this.  But being as you have extended this matter even further yet.... I fail to see where you've said that you actually used the CleanGold system yourself and are thus commenting from First-Hand knowledge.  Secondly, you again draw a focus toward your Two-Bucket system, yet you haven't even made the disclosure, so thus far it is merely an idle claim.  If and when you do make it known, the most you ought to then be stating is what you've found it to be.... and not make it a "better-than" claim but rather tell how You have found it to be.  Others testing it might then support your findings or deny them.  But I fail to see where you are getting so up tight about another product you've never used yourself.  As I said several times now, we are not in contests here.... simply evaluating.  So kindly lose the 'personalized' burn and attack... and until you yourself have used the CleanGold equipment, I feel you are very wrong to publicly make a claim of anything being fraudulent.  That very factor there just might come back to haunt you.

Pray tell, am I making myself clear?  CleanGold.... Firstly use it, or lose it.  The Two-Bucket gear-up.... tell us all about it.... or leave it lie resting.

Incidentally, your visions about how patents work, you surely will not be receiving a registered patent in such a short time frame as you indicated, those things have various processes to go through and take a fair while in the coming.  Plus, what is the objective behind filing for a patent if you’re intending to make full public disclosure?  And in doing such, you could very well harm your chances of getting the patent passed.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 24, 2010, 10:06:25 AM

Larry,

You are confusing me.  I havn't used the cleangold system as I would not purchase something when a seller refuses to provide first hand information about the product.  I used the only information provided willingly by the seller, the links to make observations and draw conclusions.  The articles surely came from those with first hand knowledge including the owner/inventor of the product.  Fossicker did ask that we do our own research and provided links.  I posted my opinion based on what I read from provided links and a video posted by someone else.  Isn't that evaluating? 

I'm sure when I post about the bucket system many will comment (good or bad) without having tried it themself.  Isn't the same as what I did?

The next you hear about buckets from me will be in a video!

As far as patents go...

Provisional Patent Application (http://inventors.about.com/od/provisionalpatent/a/Provisional_Pat.htm)

According to some schools of inventing a provisional patent application is a low-cost alternative or a preliminary step before filing for a non-provisional patent that gives one additional year of protection or grace - maybe enough time to test market your invention before investing in the cost of a regular patent.

What Is A Provisional Patent Application?
A provisional patent application allows filing without any formal patent claims, oath or declaration, or any information disclosure (prior art) statement (1). It provides the means to establish an early effective filing date in a non-provisional patent application (2). It also allows the term "Patent Pending" to be applied.

As soon as my application and drawings are received by the Patent Office I'll have the protection I want.  I will not be making full public disclosure even though I have the protection.  I will not be marketing the product to individuals but to companies who may be interested in manufacturing and selling.  In other words I'll be selling the patent or licensing. 

Provisional patents can be filed so that the info is not public.  Only those who I approach about buying will see the info and drawings.  They will also have to agree to a non-disclose/compete agreement before seeing anything even though I will have patent pending protection.  Only those who I invite will be allowed to see the info.  It's all setup online, requires verification of identity and my manual approval before they can access the pages. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 24, 2010, 12:08:39 PM
Hmmm.... just like a river who’s water flows on.  Now how can I make this even more simple to understand?   Hmmm !

By example, lets say neighbor Jones told you he witnessed a child appear on the back deck of the couple who lived on the other side of him, and then got briskly ushered back inside.  Lets say he further said for the past three weeks he could hear a child faintly whimpering within neighbor’s house, but no other sign of sad little boy was to be witnessed, and by the way Jones talked, leaving the impression something didn’t quite add up.  Lets say you further knew such second-down-from-you-neighbor did not have children of their own, so, would it be fair of you to draw the conclusion they are child abductors and to then go around the neighborhood spreading such?  Based on what you heard (second hand information)?  Then lets say one day you caught wind of Mary, sister of the lady next door to Jones, where all the whimpering was coming from, had to fly to Europe on business and asked sister Betsy to watch her boy, and under no circumstances let the spoiled-rotten son outdoors as he would surely run away if given any opportunity.  And there you stand, before all the neighborhood peers, left swallowing a big lump over wrongly condemning the baby-sitting couple, plus, losing your investment in the hang-man’s rope you had gone out and purchased.

Does this little story tell you anything?  Like..... base anything you say on first-hand knowledge, not second-hand.  Else something will sneak right up and bite you.

Now, in regard to your assertions about such said product, you clearly said you had not yourself tried it, nor would invest the money to explore it.  Why not then leave your opinion at just that, instead of keep attacking it?  I feel there is far more behind the scene than is coming to light.  And far more than you ought to keep toying with.

With all due respect, I am with the understanding that the USPTO stopped accepting Provisional Patent Applications at lease a couple of January’s ago… I just can’t remember which year, maybe more.  For I myself am familiar with the process and filed one.... if fact, it was just one day short of the cutoff date.  Unless they’ve changed it back ???   I would check that out more fully, just in case you might be wasting your time and hard earned dollars.

And if your Two-Bucket system is so simply as you imply (the use of two 5gal buckets, one at least with a drilled hole in it, and the use of a stick, somehow).... I just can’t see why you’d even seek a Provisional Patent and not go for the Non-Provisional one.  From what you’ve said, it would not take much R&D to refine, and if that good, ought to be snatched up by the first equipment supplier you pitch to. 

The morrow of what I am saying is..... quit attacking on something you have not yourself tested.  And quit giving a plug to something you are not prepared to identify.  And unless you yourself can come up with something sound for accusing another person of Fraud (mind you), leave such area alone, too.  Have I now made myself clear?

And again, a total distraction away from the heart of the topic.  Not to mention the image all this is leaving amongst our readership.  It has long since passed that point, where Enough is Enough.  Wouldn’t you agree?
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 24, 2010, 12:33:25 PM
Provisional Patents are alive and well...

Provisional Application for Patent (http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/types/provapp.jsp)

I just posted that I wouldn't mention buckets until I showed a video so I'll just say...

The two 5 gallon things and a stick are not what is being patented.  It's what gave me the idea for the product that is being patented.  It's a totally different product based on how the five gallon thing works.   It does not even use any 5 gallon things or a stick.  When you see the video you will have a real good idea of what the product is and how it works.  Being that I'm paranoid I'd prefer to not give anyone any ideas until I have Patent Pending protection.

The two five gallon thing video will be to show everyone how to make it and use it.  It's a freeby do it yourself thing.  They can choose to make and use it or not to make and use it.  It's not something that anyone would patent or even try to sell.  It's so simple and inexpensive to make that no one would buy it, they would make their own. 
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: GPEX admin on January 24, 2010, 01:11:48 PM
Excellent then, NickMarch, I just don’t like to see all the wrangling going on until a person can speak from personal experience.  While on the topic, there has been an excellent thread started on the CleanGold system, where Greg in BC apparently does hold that experience.  Please see http://gpex.ca/smf/index.php?topic=3281.msg20207;topicseen#msg20207 (http://gpex.ca/smf/index.php?topic=3281.msg20207;topicseen#msg20207)


From that which you mentioned about your new system, it sounds like it too may be a good process, not necessarily the best, but another good one for prospectors wishing to recover fine gold.  I certainly look forward to its release.  I myself just don’t understand why you are burning so much time and money on patenting something you are going to give away for free ???  And, I stand to be corrected, but if your equipment is only in the 1st year of pending patent application protection (the hush year), any public mention of it before being issued an actual patent, would then disqualify it from being entitled to an issued patent.  

Cool on the Provisional still being in place, I just might consider a thing or two myself.

Anyhow, the live and let live thing, glad we are now on the same page.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: NickMarch on January 24, 2010, 01:39:10 PM

I myself just don’t understand why you are burning so much time and money on patenting something you are going to give away for free ??? 


 I'm giving away the 5 gallon thing.  The 5 gallon thing that gave me the idea for a totally different product.  The product that will be patented.  The two are totally different to look at but do the same thing.  The free one is manual with a stick, the other is automated.   


 And, I stand to be corrected, but if your equipment is only in the 1st year of pending patent application protection (the hush year), any public mention of it before being issued an actual patent, would then disqualify it from being entitled to an issued patent. 

Provisional Patent

Enables immediate commercial promotion of the invention with greater security against having the invention stolen.
 
Provides the same confidentiality, access, and certified copies by PTO as non-provisional applications for patent

PROVISIONAL APPLICATION FOR PATENT FILING DATE REQUIREMENT

The provisional application for patent must be made in the name(s) of all of the inventor(s). It can be filed up to one year following the date of first sale, offer for sale, public use, or publication of the invention.

I take that to mean that I can make it public before even applying for a provisional patent but my paranoia won't let me do that. 

Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: ve7it on February 15, 2011, 10:44:13 PM
Hi Guys,
I havent been placer mining for about 30 years, but recent events have rekindled my interest. I would like to spend some time developing a table system for some of the fine gold we find a lot of in BC. I was trained as a metallurgist, but ended up spending most of my career automating sawmill machinery. Are any of you guys located mid Vancouver Island? I would like to get a pail of spent concentrate to use for machine development, but it is kind of the wrong time of year for playing in the water. Can anyone offer up a pail of black sand they have given up on?
cheers from Nanoose Bay.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Bill_Carson on April 25, 2011, 04:32:59 PM

Each year the river is reworking that area but if there is not sufficient energy to flush the entire deposit then the bar will reflect the effect that the energy does have.
This will be in the form of a zone near surface that gets reworked each year. That zone will show certain characterisitcs.
There will be a courser trend to the materials. Even a layer of cobble overlaying fine sand that gets many people scratching their heads.
They can't see how the river could deposit the stones but leave the sand underneath.
In fact what is happening is that the river has enough energy to remove sand from the upper layer but not the courser materials so the lag deposit of cobble builds up and creates a new dynamic on the bar. It forms up an armor layer that further shields the materials under it and prevents the scour from cutting any deeper.
This new layer will further act to retain new micro gold that washes down and across that bar each year. Building up the gold concentration and preventing deposited gold from progressing any deeper because while gold is commonly said to head for bedrock it does not dig its own hole. Gold moves to the lowest area it can within a dilated bed. If the river isn't cutting to bedrock allowing gold moving in sands and gravels to penetrate that far then the gold will be at the bottom of the layer that was moving and that might only be the top two inches of sand on an armour layered bar.




Have you noticed any rules of thumb that apply to the thickness of the concentrated zone below the armored layer?... IE: concentrated pay streaks below the armored layer of smaller boulders tend to only be 2 inches thick, while the concentrated pay steaks below the armored layer of larger boulders tend to be up to 8 inches thick? - just as a rough example.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: gandalfwhite on September 27, 2011, 02:55:45 AM
First off, thank's to everybody for your sayings in this matter. I'm a greenhorne on gold repo. Made my own sluice and now thinking of making better things since the first one didn't give anything else than blisters...  <-laugh->

From what I have heard from other goldminers around here, there's fine gold mesh -100 and finer, also nuggets in fair sizes can occur if one knows where to look.. so far I haven't been able to look in the right spots.

But I'm always intrigued by new technologies, earlier on in this thread there where talk about fishoil? haven't came across this thought before, and from what I understand it only takes the "floating" gold? how do you whip up fine gold from the concentrates? or do you just rerun the same concentrates. Will try to google for instructions on this system until I hopefully get an answer :) happy   <_miner_>  <-good_>
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: johanssonsan on September 27, 2011, 08:09:28 AM
Hello and welcome to this excellent forum. I searched this thread and can not find anything on fishoil. Anyhow - when panning or sluicing stay away from all oils. It will only put you in trouble panning out the fines. Worst case is gold leaving your pan or sluice and you will not even notice that.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: gandalfwhite on September 27, 2011, 09:51:32 AM
HI Johanssonsan,
it was NickMarch who introduced it on page 3-6 and GollyMrScience who talked about it, though it fell short on description. The photo NickMarch showed on the sludgegold was nice and small.

Since the main portion of the gold up here is more or less small -> micro, this would be more or less a way to try out for myself, as I mentioned I made a sluice myself, now in the scrap pile :D from what I have read in this forum for the past 3 days I had got it all upside down with a twist. Anyway, will see if I can recover it for another attempt on a working sluice. I had the riffles all mocked up for one thing.
as they said in old Rome, errare humanum est, "it's human to do wrong"? haven't checked that translation yet
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: rhwhite76 on July 11, 2017, 09:29:17 PM
NickMarch
If you're willing I would very much like to talk with you directly about your fish oil for micron gold unit and also your 30 gallon drum vortex unit that is like the two bucket method. Please contact me at [email protected] .
Thanks
Ron White
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: mcbain on July 11, 2017, 10:03:08 PM
Hi.Welcome to the site.Takes 2 posts to become a member.Check the dates on the posts you are inquiring about.This topic is 6 years old.The fossicker has returned and may be of some help.Luck Mcbain.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Sam McCord on August 13, 2017, 05:57:16 PM
Hello Nick March. Years ago I watched your two bucket method on Youtube and became intrigued about using it. As life would have it, years went by and a move to the State of Washington interrupted the effort. In the meantime, as time would allow, I tried to educate myself on the physics of why it works. Would you be willing to exchange some emails with me regarding what I have learned? My email is [email protected]

Take care,
Craig
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: mcbain on August 13, 2017, 07:10:49 PM
Hi.Sam,welcome to the site.Takes 2 posts to become a member.Ihave not heard of Nick in years.Luck to you,Mcbain.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Sam McCord on August 14, 2017, 04:41:34 PM
Thank you Mcbain. I will post in the General section to see if anyone knows how to get in touch with Nick. This is a great site.

Take care...
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: mcbain on August 14, 2017, 07:26:15 PM
Hi.Sam.Keep asking,So many folks are out mining during the summer season and do not  visit the site untill fall or winter.In the mean time try a Google name search.Can not hurt.Try all the full names that are short for Nick.Nicolas would be a good startJust saying Luck Mcbain.
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: Sam McCord on August 14, 2017, 09:06:11 PM
Hello, McBain. Ah! good idea to keep asking. Hadn't given much thought to people being out enjoying some mining while the weather allows. I was thinking of looking up other categories that Nick posted in and posting my questions about him there? What do you think?
Great idea doing a name search on Google. I will do that and thank you again.

Take care...
Title: Re: Micro Flood Gold
Post by: johnedoe on August 18, 2017, 10:45:46 PM
You might also post a comment on his youtube vid....
He should get an email that a post was made. I know I get notices when someone comments on one of my vids.