Minerals Engineering, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp.

1-12, 2001

Pergamon

© 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd
All fights reserved
0892-6875/01/$ - see front matter

0892-6875(00)00156-4

EVALUATION OF A DIAGNOSTIC LEACHING TECHNIQUE FOR GOLD IN
NATIVE GOLD AND GOLD _+SILVER TELLURIDES*
K. J. HENLEY ~, N.C. CLARKE I and P. SAUTER*
§ ~mdel Limited, Osman Place, Thebarton, South Australia 5031, Australia
E-mail: khenley@amdel.com
q[ Imtech Pty Ltd, 2 Lindeith Court, Sandy Bay, Hobart, Tasmania 7005, Australia
-~Homestake Gold of Australia Limited, 2 Mill Street, Perth, Western Australia 6000, Australia
(Received 16 May 2000; accepted 17 October 2000)

ABSTRACT
A detailed investigation of the stability in cyanide solutions of native gold and gold ~ silver
teUurides in a flotation concentrate from the Golden Mile, Kalgoorlie, has been undertaken to
assess whether leaching under different conditions can be used to quantify the distribution of Au
between native gold and gold i- silver tellurides, as suggested by, for example, Chryssoulis and
Cabri (1990).
The leaching was carried out on +20 Inn native gold and gold ~ silver tellurides separated from a
high-grade flotation concentrate and then diluted with barren quartz. The material leached assayed
270 ppm Au and 118 ppm Te. About 77% of the Au was present as native gold (largely liberated)
and about 23% was in gold i- silver tellurides (predominantly calaverite with trace petzite and Aubearing hessite, also largely liberated). The grainsize of the gold-bearing minerals was mainly in
the range 20/~n to lOOpm. The leach conditions used were:Stage 1:
Stage 2:

Leaching in dilute cyanide (0.1%) at pH 9.5for 24 hours to dissolve native gold but
not gold :~silver tellurides.
Leaching the residue from Stage 1 in strong cyanide (2%) at pH 12.5for 96 hours to
dissolve gold ~ silver tellurides.

Extractions of native gold and gold i-silver tellurides in the two stages of leaching were found to be
as follows:
Mineral

Native gold
Calaverite
Au-bearing
hessite
(and petzite)

% Extracted
in
Stage I

% Extracted in
Stage 2

94
6
53

5
11
40

* Presented at Hydromet 2000, Adelaide, Australia, April 2000

Total %
extracted
in Stages 1
and 2
99
17
93

tetrahedrite. only a small proportion o f the calaverite dissolved. TABLE 1 Selective pre-treatment leach stages and the minerals destroyed (from Lorentzen. labile copper sulphides.0 to 12. For the diagnostic leach procedure to be effective. 8alena. 1976. ferrites Uraninite. coal .s) at each stage (Bruce. sulphide concentrates Pyrite. 1992. marcasite Oxide coatings Silicates Gold adsorbed on carbon. leaching rates can be increased by ultrafine grinding (Liddell and Dunne. Padmanaban and Lawson. 1988. arsenopyrite. 1976. and that the diagnostic leaching procedure studied did not provide a good estimate of Au in gold 4-silver tellurides. 1991) and use of oxygen rather than air as oxidant (Jackman and Sarbutt. hydrometallurgy. However. However. Chryssoulis and Cabri (1990) use the difference in Au extraction at pH 10.0-12.5 as a measure of the Au attributable to gold + silver tellurides and this method can be considered to be an example of diagnostic leaching. labile pyrite Sphalerite. Cornwall and Hisshion. moderate pH).0 and 12. along with about half the hessite and petzite but hardly any of the calaverite.5 (Jayasekera et al. Lorentzen and Van Deventer. sphalerite.1989). The main conclusions of the investigation are that calaverite is very refractory to cyanidation. © 2000 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.. 1991). dolomite. The results showed that the bulk of the native gold dissolved in the Stage 1 leach (weak cyanide. followed by cyanidation of the residue from each stage to measure the amount of gold released from the mineral. 1961) and leaching tests on synthetic sylvanite (AuAgTe4) and calaverite (AuTe2) have shown low gold extractions (Lu and Lawson. 1995).J. 1987. 1994. Keywords Gold ores. Cathro and Walkley. although the Stage 2 leach (strong cyanide. 1990). cyanidation. each designed to destroy specific minerals (preferably only one).2 K. galena.5-11. 1992.. 1988. much more so than hessite/petzite. labile base metal sulphides. high pH) dissolved almost all the remaining hessite/petzite. such as chlorination. Lorentzen. Tumilty et al. labile sulphides. It is generally agreed that gold + silver tellurides dissolve at a slower rate than native gold and electrum (Marsden and House. goethite. 1995) Pre-treatment stage 1 NaCN washes 2 NaCN 3 Na2CO3 4 HC1 5 HC1/SnCI2 6 H2SO4 7 FeC13 8 9 10 11 HNO3 Oxalic acid washes HF Acetonitrile elution Minerals likely to be destroyed Precipitated gold Gold Gypsum and arsenates Pyrrhotite. increasing the pH to 12. The estimate of Au in native gold from the Stage 1 leach corresponded fairly closely to the native gold content as the hessite/petzite concentrations were low. Diagnostic leaching involves a series of leaches. The sequence of leaches used is designed on the basis of knowledge of the mineralogy of the sample. ore mineralogy INTRODUCTION The solubility of gold + silver tellurides in cyanide solution has been debated for many years but there is relatively little definitive experimental work in the technical literature on the subject. kerogen. All rights reserved. hematite. Table 1 from Lorentzen (1995) summarises various pre-treatment leach stages and the minerals destroyed. calcium carbonate Calcine. Henleyet al. leaching. a treatment. which breaks down calaverite prior to the Stage 2 cyanidation is required. calcite.

mercury-insoluble Au.5% Au and 19. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE The starting material for the investigation was a re-cleaner concentrate obtained by laboratory flotation of over 60 kg of KCGM plant flotation concentrate with a head grade of approximately 37 ppm Au and 47 ppm Te. 1986).~ in the plant flotation concentrate. The re-cleaner concentrate assayed 1466 ppm Au and 677 ppm Te and contained 53% of the Au and 19% of the T.1% NaCN initial concentration. or partially dissolve several minerals to different extents. The basis of this procedure. This complicates the interpretation of the leaching/cyanidation data but can be overcome to a certain extent by analysing the leach liquors for elements characteristic of the minerals being leached (e.5 and 0. Leaching was carried out as specified by KCGM at 40% solids in distilled water. Cyanide concentration decreased to 0.03% Te. However. Zn for sphalerite) and using simultaneous equations and a knowledge of the mineralogy to calculate the gold distribution . although the leach sequence selected is based on the mineralogy of the sample. pH 9. Because of the very small weight (<1 g) of telluride/gold concentrate available. followed by a strong cyanide (2%) leach at pH 12.an was given in Henley et al. This telluride/gold concentrate represented the non-magnetic fraction with a specific gravity greater than 6. Sulphuric acid was added during this stage to maintain pH control. In our investigation of diagnostic leaching to quantify the Au distribution among native gold and gold + silver tellurides. A riffled portion of the diluted telluride/gold concentrate was subjected to 24 hours cyanide bottle-roll leaching nominally to extract native gold (termed the Stage 1 leach). (1995) and this paper gives the detailed results.5 for 96 hours to dissolve gold + silver teUurides (Stage 2). which was carried out for Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd (KCGM). which is similar to that used by Chryssoulis and Cabri (1990).Evaluationof diagnosticleachingtechniquefor gold 3 A disadvantage of diagnostic leaching is that the pre-treatment leach stages are generally not specific to a single mineral and may dissolve several minerals. total Au and a wide range of elements by ICP-OES. at which point the recorded pH was 9.g.. The subsequent investigation carried out on the telluride/gold concentrate is summarised in Figure 1. we have addressed this problem by quantifying gold mineral proportions before and after each stage of leaching. Riffled portions of the diluted telluride/gold concentrate were analysed for mercury-soluble Au. Our investigation. was to test the validity of a diagnostic leach procedure for quantifying the Au attributable to native gold and gold + silver tellurides in ores and mill products from the Golden Mile. magnetic and magnetohydrostatic separation methods. A summary of the results of this investigati. cyanide leach tests were carried out on telluride/gold concentrate diluted with +20 ~tm ground quartz.67. there is little in the published literature on diagnostic leaching to indicate that the mineralogy of the residue from each leaching stage has been studied to confirm the assumptions as to which minerals have been leached.048% NaCN after 24 hours.among the minerals (Tumilty and Schmidt. so that we have a direct measure of the extent of dissolution of individual gold minerals.5 and assayed 43.1%) at pH 9. A full QEM*SEM analysis was then carried out on the telluride/gold concentrate to quantify the proportions of all minerals present. A polished section was prepared of the telluride/gold concentrate and selected mineral grains were circled and analysed quantitatively by electron microprobe. The re-cleaner concentrate was screened at 20 Ixm and from the +20 ~tm fraction a small amount of very high grade telluride/gold concentrate containing predominantly liberated native gold and gold + silver tellurides was prepared using a combination of heavy liquid. Pb for galena.5 for 24 hoursto dissolve native gold but not gold + silver tellurides (Stage 1). The dilution factor was 1:1613. Some of these analysed grains were then used by CSIRO to calibrate QEM*SEM (now known as QEMSCAN) to identify and quantify the proportions of the various gold + silver tellurides present. Kalgoorlie. is to leach in dilute cyanide (0. .

Au)2Te). washed. 2. the liquor was analysed for Au and a range of other elements and the residue was filtered. . dried and rotary subsampled to give portions which were analysed for mercury-soluble Au. pyrite. altaite (PbTe). pH 12. total Au and a wide range of elements.96 to concentrate residual heavy minerals (from the quartz diluent) for microscopic study. from which it can be seen that there is some variability in the Ag content of native gold. 1 Flowsheet for processing the teUuride/gold concentrate.J. On completion of the Stage 2 leach.96spA~ ~ysis Dilulioa with quartz Stage1 lcJtch Stage2 laeh P Fig.0% NaCN initial concentration and 1 kg/t PbO. tetrahedrite. A photomicrograph of a typical field is given in Figure 2.45%. A portion was separated centrifugally in a heavy liquid of specific gravity 2. total Au and a wide range of elements. washed.5. chalcopyrite and arsenopyrite. The major portion of the residue from the Stage 1 leach was subjected to 96 hours strong cyanide bottle-roll leaching nominally to extract gold + silver tellurides (termed the Stage 2 leach). from 4. at which point the recorded pH was 12. mercury-insoluble Au. Other minerals present in significant proportions in the telluride/gold concentrate included coloradoite (HgTe).96 sp. The NaCN concentration decreased to 1. Quantitative electron-probe microanalyses of typical grains of native gold and the gold + silver tellurides are given in Table 2. The native gold and gold + silver tellurides were predominantly liberated and between 100 ~tm and 20 ktm size. with calaverite predominating. gr. galena. Henleyet al. dried and rotary subsampled to give portions which were analysed for mercury-soluble Au. There is also some variation in the compositions of Au-bearing hessite and calaverite. the liquor was analysed for Au and a range of other elements and the residue was filtered.74% NaCN after 96 hours. mercury-insoluble Au. MINERALOGY The gold + silver telluride minerals identified in the telluride/gold concentrate were calaverite (AuTe2). On completion of the Stage 1 leach.IVl >2.54. pyrrhotite.96 to concentrate residual heavy minerals (from the quartz diluent) for microscopic study.24% to 15. petzite (AgaAuTe2) and Au-bearing hessite ((Ag.4 K. I Chemical __• Che~cal analym analysis Mmeragt~hy QEM*SF. sphalerite. A portion was separated centrifugally in a heavy liquid of specific gravity 2. Leaching was carried out as specified by KCGM at 40% solids in distilled water. products from the residues from Stages 1 and 2 were examined mineragraphically and the mineral proportions were quantified by QEM*SEM analysis. The >2.54% with an average of 7.

03 98.4 87.94 "7.49 93.2 89.1 59.3 7.3 31.9 8.1.8 7.69 99.0 89.21 98.84 2.67 100.59 2.88 98.83 0.4 67.84 29.80 57.8 11.99 97.96 0.3 0.67 .82 0.83 27.54 13.12 0.09 58.30 53.02 36.88 0.82 40.83 93.16 28.89 0.1.43 98. % Grain No.00 2.7 34.03 98.96 0.87 0.56 0.63 0.96 0.68 99.8 67.61 100.81 37. in the case of the Stage 2 residue.10 35.00 1.93 0.03 0.0 34.00 1.00 1.Evaluationof diagnosticleachingtechniquefor gold TABLE 2 Electron-probe microanalyses of gold m i n e r a l s Weight.49 84.6 0.5 5.57 41.6 3 ! . % Total Au Ag ] Te Au Ag (Au Te Total +Ag) I Native gold 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Avge 83.6 6.95 0.93 53.19 99.1 59.38 .11 0.92 0.22 15.98 57.00 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 1.00 1.96 2.00 2.00 2.06 11.00 34.97 0.00 1.93 0.89 0.92 0.00 1.77 53.33 0.19 99.97 9.41 9.00 1.8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Au-bearing hessite 12 13 14 15 16 Av~e 8.1 91.96 0.01 0.7 6.4.63 0.76 3.88 54. with virtually all of the native gold having dissolved during eyanidation.88 0.88 101.0 6.75 0.1 17 24.25 0.01 3.8 10.5 67.02 0.00 2.87 13.53 41.92 99.8 34.96 2.00 1.1 88.2 67.3 34.71 16.35 0.76 94.75 3.96 In both the Stage 1 and Stage 2 residues. marginal corrosion by cyanide (Figures 3-7).01 5.4 60.00 1.11 0.29 6.29 10.16 6.00 2.19 36.4 23.35 4.00 2.88 0.75 5.08 0.88 3.1 0.76 99.65 99.88 5.45 3.92 0.97 2.40 0.09 91.5 0.12 3.00 2.82 6.58 0.2 89.3 3 !.75 41.6 33.08 0.00 2.61 99.77 0.19 53.88 56.13 41.92 0.42 3.89 0.06 6.78 4.14 92. The calaverite was present in both residues as angular and.93 0.02 98.8 0. Au Ag Te Suggested formula Atomic proportions.2 12.67 0.3 11.5 *NA = not analysed.48 3.97 2.41 0. slightly rounded particles showing little.02 0.0 1.00 1.3 Calaverite 18 19 20 21 22 23 Avge 37.9 6.00 2.00 1.00 1.43 3.46 98.96 2.00 1.00 74.43 99.24 '7.08 0.85 36.9 11.23 0.92 57.6 12.68 100.2 92.13 53.2 25.6 3 i.55 5.5 59.42 41.00 1.13 1.75 93.96 2.11 0.7 92.83 2.45 NA* NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 99.00 1. .00 1.00 1.97 0.00 2. if any.13 .63 57.96 2.8 67.9 59.00 5.64 91.9 67.5 31.78 6.00 1.71 4.1.00 1.61 3.36 3.12 0.6 0.83 91.4 59.0 10.78 91. 0. calaverite was the main gold-bearing mineral present.00 2.20 96.3 1.15 0.12 100.90 11.6 32.76 5.04 0.00 1.00 1.8 87.6 76.7 88.6 Petzite 54.95 0.00 6.58 56.70 45.03 0.63 99.32 1.00 1.31 0.12 99.90 37.59 92.48 3.4 5.12 0.9 67.

6 K. petzite (P) and pyrite (Y). calaverite (C). Mineralogical analyses of the telluride/gold concentrate and the >2. Fig. The field contains three particles of calaverite (C). Henleyet al. The native gold commonly shows flattened and irregular shapes. Au-bearing hessite (H). and Table 4 gives the calculated chemical compositions Of the materials based on the QEM*SEM analyses.96 sp. Fig. gr. . coloradoite (O). The field contains native gold (N). products of the Stage 1 and Stage 2 residues are given in Tables 3. 3 Residue from Stage 1 (24 hours leach).J. 2 General field of view in reflected light of the telluride/go!d concentrate.

it is possible to calculate the Au distributions among the various goldbearing minerals (Table 5). The calaverite shows minimal evidence of marginal dissolution by cyanide. Fig. 4 Enlargenaent of the calaverite particle shown in upper right of Figure 3.53ppm Au respectively). .2ppm and 1. 5 Residue from Stage 2 (96 hours leach). This shows that native gold accounted for ~77% of the total Au in the telluride/gold concentrate with calaverite accounting for the bulk of the remainder.Evaluationof diagnosticle~clain$techniquefor gold Fig. calaverite accounted for most of the Au. In the Stage 1 and Stage 2 residues. A particle of calaverite shows rounded margins possibly indicating some marginal dissolution by cyanide. Using the data in Table 3 and the mercury-soluble Au values for the Stage 1 and Stage 2 residues (12.

J. A calaverite particle (C) shows possible slight evidence of marginal dissolution by cyanide (rounding. . An angular particle of calaverite shows no obvious evidence of marginal dissolution by cyanide. Fig. 7 Residue from Stage 2 (96 hours leach). 6 Residue from Stage 2 (96 hours leach). Fig.8 K. The altaite (A) particle shows more evidence of such dissolution (well developed marginal serrations). Henleyet al. presence of marginal serrations).

86 Cu.93 12. % Sphalerite.22 0. products Stage 1 residue* Stage 2 residue* 36. % Calaverite..16 1.25 5.0 CYANIDATION RESULTS Table 6 summarases the cyanide extraction data for Stage 1.1 Au distribution (%) among mineralogical sites Calaverite Au-bearing hessite & petzite 22. % Coloradoite. % 1.92 29. % Altaite.63 0.01 1.82 6.7 15.92 0.13 1.85 Pb.9 96.97 25.21 0. % Galena..00 100.2 Total 100. gr.00 Ag. liberated or exposed native gold).20 2.26 22.33 S. % Chalcopyrite.00 after recalculation free of -25% c uartz in these products. Au in gold + silver tellurides and in occluded native gold).88 Hg.88 9.18 0.96 sp.23 0.13 0.96 sp. gr.34 As. products after recalculation free of -25% TABLE 5 Gold distributions among various gold-bearing minerals Telluride/gold concentrate Stage 1 residue Stage 2 residue Native gold 76.05 1.11 2.e. % Pyrite.24 1.24 3.57 10.27 15.32 1. % 1. TABLE 4 Chemical compositions calculated from QEM*SEM data Element Gold/telluride Stage 1 Stage 2 concentrate Residue * residue * 43.26 100.71 0.28 2. which assayed 270 ppm Au and 118 ppm Te. % Hessite.70 3. % 6. .34 Au. % Te.e.00 100. % 1.67 2.34 0.30 0.97 3.69 16. % Tetrahedrite.0 100. mercury-insoluble Au (i. % Total.Evaluationof diagnosticle~hingtechniqueforgold 9 TABLE 3 Mineralogical compositions determined by QEM*SEM Gold/telluride Concentrate Mineral Native gold. % Arsenopy~dte.2 0.8 0.36 3.5 83.7 0.29 3. % 0.13 0.98 22.22 3. % Pyrrhotite. % Au-bearing hessite and petzite.11 18.20 Sb.53 10.96 23.87 22.0 100.33 1.64 0.65 2.70 0.74 1.32 0. % *QEM*SEM data on the >2.01 26.21 9.8 3. % 1.26 0.43 1. % Other minerals.73 24.83 2. total Au (mercury-soluble Au plus mercury-insoluble Au) and Te in the diluted telluride/gold concentrate. Stage 2 and Stages 1+2 relating to mercurysoluble Au (i.19 0. % 5.78 2.98 *QEM*SEM data on the >2.% 14.90 Zn.26 1. % 19.53 1.03 10.

50 17. as do those in the Stage 1 residue (Figures 3 and 4).4 99.97 217. the Stage 1 extraction of Au provided a good estimate of the amount of Au present in native gold.1 *Percentage in the feed to a stage extracted by the stage. the residue after Stage 1 and the residue after Stage 2.2 8. Because Au-bearing hessite and petzite accounted for very little of the total Au in the sample examined.5 80.64 0.76 1. Henley et al. pH 9.7) show little. evidence of marginal dissolution.0 199.2 Mercury-insoluble Au 27.09 194.53 100 74 26 7 81 20 CONCLUSIONS Our investigation has tested a diagnostic leach procedure to quantify Au in native gold and in gold + silver tellurides in a telluride/gold concentrate in which the Au is present in native gold (~77%).66 50. % in mineral 100 100 53 6 47 94 40 11 17 93 83 7 Calaverite Total 270.90 0. The evidence clearly indicates that the Stage 2 leach was relatively ineffective in dissolving calaverite and the photomicrographs of calaverite particles in the Stage 2 residue (Figures 5 .67 205. and hence the proportion of each mineral leached after 24 hours and 96 hours.6 87.66 0. Using the data in Tables 3 and 6 it is possible to calculate the amounts of Au in native gold.9 Total Au 73. p ~m in mineral 1.5 36. These are given in Table 7 and illustrated in Figure 8 and show that most (94%) of the native gold (with very little of the gold + silver tellurides) was extracted in Stage 1 but that only 11% of the calaverite and 40% of the Au-bearing hessite (and petzite) were extracted in Stage 2.9 25. %* Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 1 + Stage 2 Mercury-soluble Au 93. if any. . calaverite (-23%) and Au-bearing hessite and petzite (<1%).5.71 3.89 12. TABLE 6 Stage cyanidation extractions of various types of gold and tellurium Stage extraction. TABLE 7 Cyanide extractions of gold minerals from the telluride/gold concentrate (diluted) Native gold In head Extracted in Stage 1 In Stage 1 residue Extracted in Stage 2 Extracted in Stages 1 + 2 In Stage 2 residue 207.90 57.53 In head Extracted in Stage 1 In Stage 1 residue Extracted in Stage 2 Extracted in Stages 1 + 2 In Stage 2 residue 100 94 6 5 99 1 Au-bearing hessite and petzite Au. 24 hours) dissolved most of the native gold and about half of the Au-bearing hessite and petzite but very little of the calaverite.J. calaverite and Au-bearing hessite (and petzite) in the head.10 Au distribution.35 61.56 0.9 12.9 9. The Stage 1 leach (0.50 70.54 6.5 Te 0.1% NaCN.10 K.20 10.47 52.56 1.25 10.

A. Significance of gold mineralogical balances in mineral processing. C1-C10. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We wish to thank the management of Kalgoorlie Consolidated Gold Mines Pty Ltd and Amdel Limited for permission to publish this paper and G Wilkie and the QEM*SEM group at the CSIRO Division of Exploration and Mining for provision of the QEM*SEM analyses.J. N.J. 108-112.. Randol International Ltd. In Proceedings of the Randol Gold Forum. and Sauter. W. 1976. 54 pp..L. which breaks down calaverite prior to the Stage 2 cyanidation is required. Henley. Determining the nature and association of gold in a mill tailing. pH 12. pp.5. P. L. REFERENCES Bruce. Golden.Evaluationof diagnosticleachingtechniquefor gold 11 Au-beaflng hesslte and petzlte . a treatment. Native gold 100 Calaverite In to. Evidence for the refractoriness of gold + silver tellurides. 8 Mineralogical distribution of gold in the telluride/gold concentrate. SITES Fig. 1976. Perth '95. CSIRO Division of Mineral Chemistry Publication.° Exlmolecl in Stage 1 20 0 0 20 40 60 100 80 GOLD [XSTRIBUTION(*/*)~IONG ~ C N . Cornwall.J.. For the diagnostic leach procedure to be effective. CSIRO. The Cyanidation of Gold.. Ottawa. It is concluded that.:l sample Gold ex~action ~////////////////////~ u) Exlrscted In Stage 2 i '° I . pp. 141-143. Transactions of the Institution of Mining and Metallurgy. 99. and Cabri.G. Leaching of telluride concentrates for gold. 1995. K. R. R. The Stage 2 leach (12% NaCN. 1961.. The refractoriness of calaverite found in the present investigation confirms previous works on synthetic calaverite by Padmanaban and Lawson (1991). and Hisshion.. 312-325. the diagnostic leach procedure tested was not effective in quantifying the amount of Au gold + silver tellurides in the KCGM material because of the refractoriness of calaverite. K.J. overall. Au-bearing hessite and petzite but only very little of the calaverite. S. Chryssoulis.C. such as chlorination (Cornwall and Hisshion. Transactions of the Society of Mining Engineering of AIME. Melbourne. CANMET. Clarke. Cathro. 260. 1976). and Walkley.W. Colorado. silver and tellurium Emperor process. . 1990. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors. 96 hours) dissolved most of the remaining native gold. The Stage 2 extraction of Au did not therefore provide a good estimate of the amount of Au in gold + silver tellurides.

ed. Deportment of gold in the Witwatersrand system. 1991. V.recent developments. And Sarbutt. S. vol 2: Extractive Metallurgy of Gold. 1995.. Lorentzen. Western Australia. The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 1991.. Diagnostic leaching in the development of flowsheets for new deposits. pp. L. Randol International Inc. Melbourne. The AuslMM Proceedings.. 1990. The recovery of gold-refractory telluride concentrates by the Metprotech fine milling process.com . J. and Lawson.C. 187-189. Colorado. Minerals Engineering. Randol International Inc.. Tumilty. and Avraamides. 1992. Lu. pp.W.A. K. Jayasekera. pp. and Schmidt. Lorentzen. The AuslMM Proceedings. S....J. 597 pp.. I.G. In Proceedings of the Randol International Gold Conference. K. J. and Dunne. The mechanisms of leaching of gold from refractory ores.S. and Lorentzen. pp. and Dunne. 1989. Ritchie. Golden. L. 1992. Sweeney. Colorado.S. and Van Deventer.. In Gold 100. and House. 299(2). I. J. R. London. Colorado. 247-256. 1988. Correspondence on papers published in Minerals Engineering is invited by e-mail to bwills@min-eng. vol.296(1). The Chemistry of Gold Extraction. L. J.S. Ellis Horwood.. Jayasekera. Tumilty. 120-122. Z. 1988. and Avraamides. Proceedings of the Metallurgical Society of the Canadian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. 31-37. Western Australia. D. pp.. Squaw Valley. pp. Johannesburg. A. Liddell. Metallurgical properties of synthetic sylvanite. 1377-1388.12 K. Henley etaL Jackman. 89-93. Golden. I. Some guidelines to the design of a diagnostic leaching experiment.M. I. C. Ultra-fine grinding effect on leach recovery from refractory gold ores. Randol International Inc. Metallurgical properties of synthetic calaverite. The South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy. Pergamon Press. Golden. 5(10-12). 1986. In Proceeding of the_International Symposium on Gold Metallurgy. R.. In Proceedings of the Randol Gold Conference. In Proceeding of the Randol Gold Forum. In Proceedings of the Randol International Gold Conference.M.. 8(3). Prospects for the direct leaching of gold tellurides . Perth. Liddell. R. and Lawson. 349-358. The recovery of gold from a telluride concentrate. F. F.. In World Gold '91..G. 157-167. K. Marsden. Randol International Ltd. 541-553. Electrochemical aspects of leaching gold telluride. Perth. J.J. Colorado. Wyslouzil and G. I.S. 55-58.. Minerals Engineering. Padmanaban. Golden. Toronto. Salter..C. McDonald.. Proceeding of the International Conference on Gold. Sacramento. Ritchie.M. 181-183. J.A. 1994. pp.