HF ultrasonic cleaner report

Beat me to it. A Hartman whistle is far more powerful than cheapo electronics and transducers. Don't use it at close range, or you may damage the silly dog.

I'm interested too. A nice addition to the dropbox? It *is* machined metal.

Thanks,

Joe Gwinn

Reply to
Joseph Gwinn
Loading thread data ...

Can't see much risk of dishwashing soap & water with a touch of ammonia...

Well I wouldn't use it with the abrasive stuff, no. But soapy water? I'll let you know once I pick one up.

Yup.

Reply to
Dave Hinz

Chit...sigh.. Oh well. Humm...that may..may be big enough..Ill have to pull one down and check the bits.

Thanks

Gunner

"Deep in her heart, every moslem woman yearns to show us her t*ts" John Griffin

Reply to
Gunner

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 18:51:19 -0500, with neither quill nor qualm, Joseph Gwinn quickly quoth:

(Thanks, Don.)

Yes, excellent idea, Joe. (Don, please dropbox 'em!)

-- History is often stranger than fiction. Fiction has to be plausible. History is what happens when people don't follow the script. --pyotr filipivich, RCM

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Oddly enough..I seldom ever see them. All sorts of other cleaning machines..big enough for batches of machined parts..but never in my memory an ultrasonic cleaner.

But Ill hunt around after I find my Round tuit and finish the rest of the projects Ive not started yet..sigh

Gunner "Deep in her heart, every moslem woman yearns to show us her t*ts" John Griffin

Reply to
Gunner

Just happed to get a used Branson 2200 cleaner last week for $30 bucks. Ultrasonic works fine, but I can't seem to get the heater to go on. I Toggle thru the little menu selector but the heat option LED won't go on. When pressing the on/off button while in the set temp. position you can hear a realy or something click inside but no heat. Down loaded the schematic from Branson's site but it's for the non-microproccessor control version. Maybe I just need to open it up and see if the heater is bad - which may not be replacable anyway...

Reply to
oldjag

formatting link

Reply to
Steve Ackman

Me Too!!

Gunner

"Deep in her heart, every moslem woman yearns to show us her t*ts" John Griffin

Reply to
Gunner

AH!! ....that would be way cool..but the ammo..its expensive.

Gunner

"Deep in her heart, every moslem woman yearns to show us her t*ts" John Griffin

Reply to
Gunner

Check MSC for operating frequencies - have a fundamental and mix it with a sweep. Then rely on f+m and f-m as the fundamental and mix work with Foret (sp) generate the frequencies.

Martin

Mart> >

Reply to
Martin H. Eastburn

OK. I've just sent them to the dropbox. Looks for arf_ow.

Reply to
Don Foreman

Fourier

Reply to
buffalo

Langevin transducers are intrinsically narrow-band devices. Exciting them with a swept freq doesn't result in swept freq results because while the Fourier results of mixing may be in the excitation and appear on a spectrum analyzer, they won't show up in the tank.

Reply to
Don Foreman

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 22:33:57 -0600, with neither quill nor qualm, Don Foreman quickly quoth:

Har! Woof, woof? Thanks, Don.

-- History is often stranger than fiction. Fiction has to be plausible. History is what happens when people don't follow the script. --pyotr filipivich, RCM

Reply to
Larry Jaques

Ouch. Great name.

Could you also post the name, author, date of publication et al of the book from which these pages came? It looks interesting. Thanks,

Joe Gwinn

Reply to
Joseph Gwinn

Thanks for the report, Don. I've used several Bransons over the years in labs and have been eyeing the HF units for home but was concerned they would be way underpowered. We usually had a wire basket to suspend items in the middle of the tank instead of letting them sit on the bottom, which seemed to do a better job on all sides and stopped any worries about stuff sitting right on top of the crystals. Second, we kept the tank full of water and put our soap solutions and solvents in small beakers to clean small parts, and set them in the basket. Kept us from having to wash out the tank all the time and saved on expensive organic solvents.

Has anyone used the bigger 91957? 1.5 qts vs 1.25 L, but more importantly 100W in vs 60W, for >2x the $$. I was going to also recommend using hot water in the tank but I just read both manuals and they both specifically warn against using anything hotter than lukewarm. I wonder if their crystals have problems surviving at higher temperatures? Heat sure helps the cleaning action. Hm, they also want the item to be cleaned put directly on the tank bottom, even going so far as to say use the basket to hold it there. Either that is for parts that float, or I've been doing it all wrong :-).

-- Regards, Carl Ijames carl dott ijames aat verizon dott net (remove nospm or make the obvious changes before replying)

Reply to
Carl Ijames

I've been heating the solution to 140 to 170F. It makes a significant difference in cleaning efficacy. If the unit craps out, then it does; I don't need a tool that can't be used. That caution may be a "hot coffee" CYA from the lawyers.

I put stuff in the basket, not directly on the bottom. I think detuning it with a mass directly on the bottom is more likely to bust a 'ducer than running it at 170F.

I like your idea re using beakers. I'll try that.

Branson specifies output power while HF specs input power, so I suspect these units are not quite as powerful as a Branson of comparable size. Many Bransons also have drain valves and built-in heaters, nice features. The HF unit is no Branson, but it does seem to work and the price was right.

The larger 91957, while not much more in volume, also has a larger max dimension of 9" long in the tank, which might be useful for some jobs. I just wasn't up for ~3X the price since nearly everything I do fits in the smaller one with no problem.

I tried it last night on some small parts I anodized, including one that I'd polished on a buffer. Getting the wax off after buffing can be a real problem, but the ultrasonic did it. I've never gotten such good results with anodizing.

Reply to
Don Foreman

Good point on the hot coffee - I'm sure that is the answer. If you start with hot water the ultrasonic energy will keep it hot, but it will take a long time to get hot starting from cold water. Wonder if you could use one of those immersion coffee cup heaters to heat the water if you keep the tank full instead of emptying it each use? Give it a few minutes to heat up without the ultrasonics, then take out the heater and start cleaning. Also agree on not owning tools you can't use.

That 3x is why I asked - hate to buy it if I don't need it :-).

Oh, you can see "hot" and "cold" spots in the tank by looking at the surface of the water. We always put our beakers in the hot spots for maximum action. You can also impedance match the load by varying the water depth somewhat to get max surface agitation - this depth varies with viscosity and density so it is a moving target but sometimes a little tweaking helps a lot. One test is to put in some aluminum foil. When the system is "right" the foil will almost explode. Cavitation strips off the oxide, the bare aluminum reacts with the water releasing hydrogen which embrittles the remaining aluminum, the fresh oxide gets stripped, and it all repeats faster than I can type and it looks like holes are being blown in the foil. Never cleaned much bulk aluminum so I don't know if this is a problem or not - we were mostly cleaning stainless steel vacuum parts.

-- Regards, Carl Ijames carl dott ijames aat verizon dott net (remove nospm or make the obvious changes before replying)

Reply to
Carl Ijames

I have doubts that some antireflection coatings, especially on plastics will survive for long.

Reply to
Ian Stirling

That material was from:

Ultrasonic Engineering (With Particular Reference to High Power Applications) ; Alan E. Crawford Butterworths Scientific Publications, London 1955

I have also posted some more material to the dropbox as arf-ow2. The cite for that is in the text file there. It may be a bit easier to design from the info in this one.

Having a inexpensive piezo tweeter is still a good thing, because they make reasonably good microphones at these frequencies. With one of those and a scope you could see what your whistle is doing. I doubt that you would even need an amplifier, though you might want some simple highpass filtering.

If anyone gets one working, pls post findings!

Reply to
Don Foreman

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.