Ultrasonic cleaner question

[cazclocker]

I use an inexpensive 2.5 liter capacity ultrasonic from Harbor Freight – this one: http://www.harborfreight.com/25-liter-ultrasonic-cleaner-95563.html

It works fairly well, and I don’t have any complaints about it. But I still have a question, more out of curiosity than anything else. My habit has been to use ziploc sandwich bags to put my clock parts and cleaning solution. Then, I put the bag into the ultrasonic and fill the remaining void in the tank with plain tap water. After a couple of cycles with the ultrasonic, I can pick up the sandwich bag and easily recover the cleaning solution by pouring it back into the plastic milk jug I keep it in. Once I’ve done that, I just pick up the ultrasonic and take it outside and throw the still-clean tap water on the ground. I’ve been doing it this way because the ultrasonic doesn’t have a drain plug like the expensive ones have, so this method lets me empty the ultrasonic very easily, and it’s a bit easier to pour my cleaning solution from the sandwich bag than from the ultrasonic tank, plus I use much less cleaning solution at a time because I’m only filling the sandwich bag rather than the whole ultrasonic’s tank.

Here’s my question: am I losing any cleaning power by making the ultrasonic waves travel through the sandwich bag? Common sense tells me that the ultrasonic waves have to penetrate the stainless-steel tank before they ever reach the liquid filling, so an extra layer of thin plastic won’t make any difference. So I kind of doubt if I’m losing any potential cleaning power – after all, I’m very pleased with the cleaner’s results. But I guess I’m just curious if you guys know more than I do…should I be filling the whole tank with cleaning solution?

[willofiam]

Hey Doug. I have never used the sandwich bag idea you have, so I am not sure if it is losing cleaning power or not, but as you said @cazclocker wrote:

the ultrasonic waves have to penetrate the stainless-steel tank before they ever reach the liquid filling

so what I have done if I use something other than my clock cleaning solution (I have the tank full of that) is use my wifes stainless steel bowl and let that “float” in the clock cleaning solution, so what I am saying is you could try to use plain water in the tank and try a steel or glass bowl with solution in it….see if it works a bit better…..

my thoughts on the sandwich bag is because it is flexible it may have a adverse effect….

USE CAUTION if you steel your wifes bowl though, my experience….that too has a adverse effect 😯 William

[cazclocker]

Thanks William! I hadn’t considered that a plastic bag, being flexible, could have an adverse effect rather than being “transparent” as I was imagining – the flexibility of the plastic could be damping the ultrasonic waves instead of simply transmitting them. Interestingly, I have a very good friend who uses my idea, except with a chemist’s glass beaker instead of a sandwich bag, and he reports excellent results. But I never thought of a stainless steel bowl! That would be easier for me to find locally than a beaker.
Thanks for the good idea…
…Doug

[arutha]

Hi Doug,
there is a simple test you can do to see if the ultrasonic is working through the bag, just put a piece of aluminium foil into the sandwich bag along with your fluid or water and let the tank run for a minute. If the foil now has small holes in it you will know the ultrasonic is penetrating the bag ok.
My tank is on the large side so I have an 5ltr ice-cream tub inside the tank that holds my cleaning solution and a stainless basket that goes inside of that to hold the clock parts. I have not found a problem with this affecting the cleaning action.
Paul.

[david pierce]

If the parts are coming as clean as you want them then it looks like a great idea. If the machine agitates the solvent as the solvent desolves and loosens the crud on the part, then it is doing what it can do.
david

[bernie weishapl]

I use a screen strainer the same one my wife uses to drain veggies in my ultrasonic. Works excellent and cleans the parts well.

[cazclocker]

Well, the results are in – last night I did a test with my ultrasonic. I cut two pieces of aluminum foil of identical size. On Arutha’s suggestion, I placed one piece in a water-filled ziploc sandwich bag, just as I’ve been doing with my clock movement parts. The other piece of aluminum foil I placed in a water-filled old coffee cup. I ran both through the ultrasonic (with the remaining tank capacity filled with water) for the same cycle duration, and compared the aluminum squares. The one in the plastic sandwich bag had holes in it, but not as many holes as the foil piece in the coffee cup. Compared to the foil in the sandwich bag, the foil in the coffee cup was almost obliterated! Apparently Arutha was right – the plastic bag was “rolling with the punches” and absorbing some of the energy from the transducer, while the coffee cup (even though it is nearly 1/4″ thick!) allowed the energy to pass right through it and onto the surface of the foil.

Arutha, thanks for the suggestion for the test. It was an easy way to compare the efficiency of two different ways to hold parts for cleaning.

…Doug

[arutha]

Hi Doug,
it was William who suggested the bag might impede the ultrasonic action
Glad the test worked for you Doug, something I picked up on the internet a while back.
Paul.

[chris mabbott]

Personally, I never use an ultrasonic for pocket watches as they do, IMHO, cause damage, as in the perforation of the tin foil. They can remove engravers wax and in some cases remove/loosen gilting, plating etc.

If, it is something that is beyond hand cleaning, like a gold or silver chain, a ring that is just nasty with unreachable parts, then yes.
I suppose for me, like some users who prefer the bow method, I get a feel for the piece being worked on, while I’m cleaning, I see every part of the item and all of those parts are removed for individual, personal attention & inspection.

I feel that ultrasonic cleaners, for many, have become a short cut, an easy escape to actually getting your hands dirty 😆 Many items for sale on the bay that look good on the surface, have not been properly cleaned under the hood. I acquired one such item recently, not because it was clean, but because it was something I’ve searched for.
When it arrived, I could immediately tell that it had been plonked into a USC, the movement felt rough and lifeless, not smooth. When I removed the jewels, they were dirty around the settings and the balance jewels had obviously not been separated.

USC’s have their place, no doubt, but not for PW’s. I just thought I would play devils advocate and throw this in 😆

[arutha]

Hi Chris,
just to come at you from the dark side ( 😈 ) I have used my ultrasonic tank for clock platforms, these include carriage clock platforms, some of which can be as small pocket watch escapements. If they are used properly they will not cause any form of damage to clock or watch parts. If they did I am pretty sure the ultrasonic watch cleaners would have stopped being made as people would realise this and stop buying/using them. If you are seeing damage I would say whoever cleaned that watch may have left it in for too long or possibly they used some form of home made solution thats wasn’t suitable?
Just my thoughts regarding your thoughts
Paul.

Edit.
I do however agree with you they can remove wax, gilding etc so in this case you need to be careful.

[chris mabbott]

hhhh

[chris mabbott]

@Arutha wrote:

If they are used properly they will not cause any form of damage to clock or watch parts. If they did I am pretty sure the ultrasonic watch cleaners would have stopped being made as people would realise this and stop buying/using them.
I do however agree with you they can remove wax, gilding etc so in this case you need to be careful.

Actually Paul, many people and companies have realized the trouble they can cause and have stopped using them and are turning to the gentler, traditional, washing machines.
Don’t forget that USC’s were NOT developed for the watchmaking industry, they were adapted or adopted to it, possibly by some jeweler, realizing that he could save loads of time by just dumping the whole movement into an Ultrasonic cleaner therefore allowing him to take in more items = more money Obviously the method caught on and was justified by the faithful.

Unfortunately, the easy path is always followed and many people now do not want to spend the whole day or two days properly cleaning a watch when it can be done in 20 mins…. Hard work pays off over time but laziness pays off right now 😆 I wish I’d coined that phrase, love it.. 😈
So here is the main reason why you see those that are AYE in favor of the quick and easy way, it’s economics and becomes a habit, but ultimately the damage caused is not seen until later, unless it’s gilding, plating or engraving wax, which is equally not acceptable, or shouldn’t be 😮

[cazclocker]

WOW! I kind of like the direction this discussion has taken. From my perspective, I think that USC’s are simply another tool that have a useful place in the clockmaker’s or watchmaker’s shop. To me, the greatest advantage that an ultrasonic cleaner offers is the ability to effectively clean the inside surfaces of the little crevices & cavities that are found in irregularly-shaped objects.

Chris Mabbot, you raise a good point – an USC can remove engraver’s wax and other delicate materials. For situations like that, I am thinking that using an ultrasonic would be a less-than-wise decision, when it could be cleaned just as thoroughly by soaking and using an appropriate brush.

Another consideration is the cracking in brass that can happen when using ammoniated cleaning solutions. From what I have read, the damage is extremely small and can only be observed using a microscope. So I could easily see where damage to a delicate piece could occur due to the cleaning solution, but the blame placed on the ultrasonic cleaner.
…Doug

[arutha]

Actually Paul, many people and companies have realized the trouble they can cause and have stopped using them and are turning to the gentler, traditional, washing machines.
Don’t forget that USC’s were NOT developed for the watchmaking industry, they were adapted or adopted to it, possibly by some jeweler, realizing that he could save loads of time by just dumping the whole movement into an Ultrasonic cleaner therefore allowing him to take in more items = more money Obviously the method caught on and was justified by the faithful.

Chris I have no reason not to belive you but can you back that up with any evidence? I have had a brief look on the internet but can’t see much other than people asking if they can put their complete watch in an ultrasonic tank!
I think this is a very important issue and if this is the case I would immediately stop using my ultrasonic tank for anything small.

Doug,
it doesn’t matter what method you use to do any job, there will always be someone who disagrees with your methods as theirs are better, ammoniated cleaning solution, polishing clock parts, mainspring lubrication. I use ammoniated solution but only a very small amount of ammonia, about 20ml to 5 ltrs of water and soft soap. You hear the horror stories of clocks crumbling away after being soaked in a solution over-night but I do wonder how strong the solution was and my clock is in the solution for only 20 minutes. The other thing is, if you do use ammonia, to make sure you wash it all out and give it a damn good rinse. Solder flux is another thing that must be completely removed from brass otherwise it will eat away at it.
Paul.

[bernie weishapl]

I was the fence for a long time about USC’s and ammonia type cleaners. I did a test with 3 pieces of brass from a old clock movement. I used a ammonia cleaner from a supplier. I left one piece of brass in for 24 hrs. Rinsed it well in hot water and then in denatured alcohol. The other two pieces were treated the same way except one was left in 48 hrs and one for 72 hrs. I sent those pieces to a friend of mine that has access to several high power microscopes. He said he saw one slight stress crack in the one left for 72 hrs. The others he could not see anything.

So IMHO yes USC’s and ammonia might cause stress cracking but would have to be left in a heck of a lot longer than we do. I am guessing that most of these old antique clocks and watches have been cleaned with USC’s since they first came along and probably numerous times. So until someone presents me with clear, proof positive results that harm is caused by either I will continue to use it. I think the key is what Paul said. Make sure you rinse each piece really well. Right now I use ZEP Commercial Heavy Duty Citrus Degreaser. It is professional strength and concentrated. I mix it 5 to 1 and it seems to work just as well as any cleaner I have bought from a watch and clock supplier.

[Author]

Posts