- To participate in the 911Metallurgist Forums, be sure to JOIN & LOGIN
- Use Add New Topic to ask a New Question/Discussion about Hydrometallurgy.
- OR Select a Topic that Interests you.
- Use Add Reply = to Reply/Participate in a Topic/Discussion (most frequent).
Using Add Reply allows you to Attach Images or PDF files and provide a more complete input. - Use Add Comment = to comment on someone else’s Reply in an already active Topic/Discussion.
Best Carbon for CIL CIP gold recovery (12 replies)
Whether Indian supply or Philippine supply (Coconut shell), carbon is a carbon. The selection of carbon depends on so many factors. Some of them are shape, size, hardness, etc. Depending on the type of project (water, gold, waste, etc) a carbon is selected. Most often, cost and availability match together.
A project I did on activated carbon reviewed that, the Norit rod-like carbon has a higher gold adsorption and desorption rate than granular activated carbon. The decision on the best carbon for a project depends on a series of test work.
Since the company I am associated with is in the Philippines, we use Philippines coconut carbon. Please note the spelling "Philippines" not Philippines.
Preference on carbon to be used is dependent on a number of factors. In the developing economies, price of the activated carbon in relation to the value of product to be recovered using the activated carbon is a key consideration. The process dynamics need to be considered as characteristics of activated carbon used in static conditions are different from those of agitation conditions. Test work tends to give informed conclusions.
Don't forget that Sri Lanka produces a lot of activated carbon and in fact have a major activated carbon producer.
I have not personally come across this brand. For use in gold plants if the carbon is reasonably active and has hardness qualities which enable it to withstand a bit of (careful) handling are sufficient then a decision is generally made on cost and product availability and sometimes on the vendor’s service delivery. I note someone suggested one of the extruded carbons and these are also good for gold plants but may have a tendency to blind inter-tank screens as they wear down.
If you stay with the main brands you shouldn't have too many problems. If you are unsure then base your selection on brand acceptance in the industry you are working in.
Haycarb and Sri Lankan coconut shell carbon have been used successfully in test laboratories during my experience at Casmyn Research.
Jacobi Carbon has acquired PICA in 2011. Their best product for the gold industry is PICA GOLD G210AS. Please check link here for the product data sheet: http://is.gd/j2skhF
How do you mean "used successfully" would it replicate usage in a CIL Plant?
The source of the carbon is probably not as important as the quality control in the manufacturing process to produce a product with a decent balance of hardness, porosity and size distribution. In my experience, testing of virgin carbon in the lab yields little useful information about final performance in the field, as the equilibrium performance after extended contact with foulants and multiple regeneration cycles overwhelms any performance tests performed on clean carbon. Since the plant solution tails are too precious to risk, and there is often a large stock of carbon in circuit, (making recovery from long term problems lengthy to recover from), it’s usually a safe bet to stick with a leading supplier.
Please join and login to participate and leave a comment.
To all you clever Gold Metallurgists, which carbon does you prefer to use, Indian supply or Philippine supply (Coconut shell).
Both countries sell Coconut shell carbon, getting a supplier that has tested their carbon to ATSM standard is the cruncher. ATSM is a test methods used to specify activated carbon and seen the name ASTM and a test number listed as a standard reference such as Iodine number 900 minimum per ASTM D 4607
"ASTM activated carbon standards are an important tool that allows manufacturers to have quality control test standards for production purposes and permits end-users to compare activated carbon products using such properties such as hardness, ash, activity, density, moisture, etc. that might have implications for their application or use of the activated carbon."