collapse


* User Info

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Who's Online

Troy

Dot Guests: 160 | Dot Users
Dot Hidden: 0

* Board Stats

  • stats Total Members: 12897
  • stats Total Posts: 129098
  • stats Total Topics: 18066
  • stats Total Categories: 5
  • stats Total Boards: 48
  • stats Most Online: 814

* Advertisers

Gear Pan
The lil Gold Spinner
BC GOLD
The lil Gold Spinner
The Pocket Sluice

Author Topic: 38% irridium and 4% gold  (Read 1404 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chignecto

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 4
  • Province/State: Nb
  • Country: ca
  • Kudos: 0
38% irridium and 4% gold
« on: August 02, 2017, 02:52:56 PM »
found a chunk of metal,got it read by a xerf analyzer,it read 38% irridium ,56% IRON AND 4% GOLD AND SMALL AMOUNTS OF TITANIUM,i BROUGHT IT TO A DIFFERENT LOCATION IN A DIFFERENT PROVINCE ,THEY TESTED IT WITH A WAY OLDER MACHINE,IT TESTED FOR SILVER NICKLE AND COPPER.ANYONE HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE TESTING WITH THE NEW XRF ANALYZERS??

Offline jobinyt

  • PPT Invited
  • *****
  • Posts: 373
  • Kudos: 19
Re: 38% irridium and 4% gold
« Reply #1 on: January 13, 2019, 01:03:01 PM »
Yeah - if  by newer you mean a cheap - couple thousand dollar Chinese gadget - not properly calibrated your results are maybe not real close;)

I wonder where the chunk was found and what the final determination was?

Offline sunshine

  • PPT Invited
  • *****
  • Posts: 2126
  • Province/State: Ontario, but also prospect in BC
  • Country: ca
  • Kudos: 33
Re: 38% irridium and 4% gold
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2019, 10:59:54 AM »
I had some rocks tested by an expensive XRF and the results were very interesting, including one 5 lb rock that was PGM too.  The problem with XRF is it only gives a result for one little spot on the outside.  IMHO: Fire assay is more accurate on ore.   
See my YouTube channel for fun amateur video:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnz8kX6AZOeZbRt0F9XqVJA

Offline JOE S (INDY)

  • PPT Invited
  • *****
  • Posts: 1190
  • Province/State: Trapper Creek, Alaska with Winters in Idaho
  • Country: us
  • Kudos: 69
  • Wiser Mining Through Endless Personal Mistakes
Re: 38% irridium and 4% gold
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2019, 12:17:13 PM »
"The problem with XRF is it only gives a result for one little spot on the outside."

Wouldn't multiple sample spots on the rock give a better average? 

As I (probably imperfectly) understand it, XRF analysis is usually used on more homogeneous samples, for example, a Dore' Bar.
Wiser Mining Through Endless Personal Mistakes

Offline sunshine

  • PPT Invited
  • *****
  • Posts: 2126
  • Province/State: Ontario, but also prospect in BC
  • Country: ca
  • Kudos: 33
Re: 38% irridium and 4% gold
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2019, 09:58:53 AM »
Good question.  After my tests, I see two main uses for XRF.  (1) Get the info on one little spot (or multiple little spots) on the outside to get a "feel" for the content.  This is useful to help identify everything from crystals to ore.  I would not assume that the whole sample is the same as any point tested.  But it does tell you some interesting stuff.  When I tested for silver, it was a complete surprise (to me) that there was PGM and rare earth minerals.   In some cases, according to the XRF, more PMG than silver in some of my samples.  (2) test the ore after a melt.  This is probably the best thing to do and would be more accurate, because what is on the outside can probably be assumed after a melt to be on the inside.  I had found many pounds of melted "metal" outside an abandoned silver mine with my detector and was unsure if it was lost from silver refining or was lead.  The XRF confirmed it was mostly lead. 
See my YouTube channel for fun amateur video:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnz8kX6AZOeZbRt0F9XqVJA