My version of an Ultrasonic Record Cleaner

Interesting that they don't consider any kind of label protection necessary.

Looking at the set up with 8 records immersed, it does make one wonder what it is doing to the strength of the US wave. Since it is hard to judge the efficiency of cleaning directly it would be nice if someone came up with a transducer probe to meter the US power.
 
Hi Magnet,
Do you need just the bearing --- I'm assuming you have the bearing housing? I might have another one of the bronze bearings floating around.
B B

Nevermind on this - i heard back from your specified vendor ( sterling whatever). They DO Have those parts in stock, but they just have a woefully outdated online ordering system that doesn't accurately represent what they actually have in stock
 
Jeez,
I'd really like to try to make one of these machines, but don't really have access to lathes and other such machining tools. I'm not totally inept, but not an ace handyman either. Is it possible to build one without them? Does anyone have plans, instructions, parts lists on how to build this more simply? From the look of some of these lists, it seems quite complicated.
Thanks
 
Hi All,

Over hear in the UK or via ebay we can mostly Only get the 40hk cleaning baths at a reasonable price even the expensive ones are mostly 40hz or its not listed in the specs.....

That kind of leaves us with two types of 6 ltr, cleaning baths.
1, the push button control type with digital display. £175

Which it appears that these are the ones most of you guys are using.
Or this
2, the analog type with graduated knobs. £130
Both have much the same spec

So my question is which would be better to use, The simple analogue or the electronic displayed one.
Would vibration from the transducers cause problems?

Will want to order it soon as I have a 301 & a few Lencos to clean up in it first !

ebuzz,
These things are not difficult to make, look carefully at all the pictures!
Ill be building mine in the garden shed with very few tools etc no plans Or drawings just the basic knowledge of what the others on hear have already done. & use whatever materials come to hand.

Jay
 
Hi All,



ebuzz,
These things are not difficult to make, look carefully at all the pictures!
Ill be building mine in the garden shed with very few tools etc no plans Or drawings just the basic knowledge of what the others on hear have already done. & use whatever materials come to hand.

Jay
Thanks, I guess what I'm worried about is the motor and spindle parts. Not sure I'll know what kind to get, where to get them and what spindle will actually fit in the motor and thru the LP hole.
 
although the RPMs are to high, I've used a motor from an old microwave oven to build a vacuum record cleaner, so the same principles apply.
You could use the gearbox parts from one motor & ad it another to get the very slow speeds required.
Drill extensions make good spindles.
As your in the US try Harbour Freight, when I lived in Montgomery Alabama I used to get all sorts of stuff from them

Jay
 
Hi All, this is my first post and wanted to say thanks for the inspiration to undertake this project. I found loads of helpful information and was able to evaluate all of the possible builds before settling on bbftx's version 2.

I made a couple of minor changes based on what I had available. I added a 1/2 inch conduit clamp to hold the filter discharge line. I also incorporated the use of wheel weights from a local tire shop as a counter balance. Other than that I think I used most all of the parts bbftx listed.

Thanks to LuckyTiger for this link Findings Outlet :: Tools :: Ultrasonics :: Sonix IV Ultrasonics, I was able to source the Sonix IV 136h for $450.00.

Again, thanks to bbftx for sharing his knowledge and experience.

Now if someone could tell me how to upload more than on picture at a time I'd be all set:D
 
Sprinter's Build

Nice, Sprinter. That is a killer price on the Sonix machine. Great find by lucky tiger.

To load more pictures in a post, do as follows:
Click on "Go Advanced" under the reply box.
You'll get a window with a lot more icons across the top.
Click the Paper Clip icon. You should get a popup window that allows you to "Choose Files" to upload. You can attach multiple images this way.
Hit Preview Post and you'll see how they'll look in your post.

I agree with pcb too --- cool Ford. Was that a DIY project too?

Cheers,
B B
 
Just be aware, these guys won't ship to a different address even if you try to add a verified address to credit. Not a problem for most, but it was for me. I had my uncle order ;)

Hi All, this is my first post and wanted to say thanks for the inspiration to undertake this project. I found loads of helpful information and was able to evaluate all of the possible builds before settling on bbftx's version 2.

I made a couple of minor changes based on what I had available. I added a 1/2 inch conduit clamp to hold the filter discharge line. I also incorporated the use of wheel weights from a local tire shop as a counter balance. Other than that I think I used most all of the parts bbftx listed.

Thanks to LuckyTiger for this link Findings Outlet :: Tools :: Ultrasonics :: Sonix IV Ultrasonics, I was able to source the Sonix IV 136h for $450.00.

Again, thanks to bbftx for sharing his knowledge and experience.

Now if someone could tell me how to upload more than on picture at a time I'd be all set:D
 
Kuzma mentioned to me; my emphasis added. Any thoughts?

"You need to fulfil this criteria:
- 40 Khz or more
- size of bath ( for 8 records ( width 240 mm) you need minimal internal dimension 295 x x 135 mm)
- temperature control ( works best if heated up to 40 degrees Celsius)
- power control adjustment- most important- full power is too much ( water with minimal ripples)
- time control"
 
Amazon no longer carries Kodak Photo Flo 200, and bhphotovideo.com is sold out at the moment. On the other hand, freestylephoto.biz was sold out, but now has more of the Kodak product available. I don't know whether all this is a fluke, or a sign that Photo Flo will become increasingly difficult to obtain in the wake of the Kodak bankruptcy. If a shortage does develop, freestylephoto.biz offers a photo flo clone at a slightly lower price called LegacyPro 200 Wetting Agent. This appears to be a suitable substitute, but I have not tried it.

I'm currently exploring alternatives to the Alconox detergents I've been testing to date (I'll post more on these later --- they have strengths and weaknesses). Of course one of the options is the Photo flo + IPA formula that most folks on this thread are using. The MSDS for Photo Flo 200 reveals that its main ingredients are the surfactant, Triton X-114 (CAS 9036-19-5), at 5-10% and propylene glycol (used for de-icing airplanes among other things) at 25-30%. I'm not sure what the propylene glycol's intended function is in the photography application (possibly a stabilizer), but I think the Triton X-114 is the ingredient we're most interested in. If anyone has information to the contrary, please let me know.

You will mostly find positive reports around the web from people who use Photo Flo for record cleaning, but there are some who claim it should never be used because it leaves residues that either compromise sound or even damage vinyl over time. While it's true that these ingredients have very slow evaporation rates, and this implies some form of residual film, I'm not convinced that anyone has demonstrated any negative effects in practice, especially at the very low concentrations proposed in this thread. On the other hand, getting Triton X-114 without the propylene glycol (described as a sticky liquid at room temp.) would seem to be a good thing. A product called Arista Flo Wetting Agent, also available at freestylephoto.biz in 4oz and 16oz bottles, provides exactly this. The Arista Flo MSDS only lists Triton X-114 at 20-30% concentration, and it contains no propylene glycol. I think this product should be of interest to followers of this thread who use the no-rinse approach to ultrasonic cleaning.

In fact, I was on the verge of ordering the Arista Flo product, but then was tempted to try the Library of Congress recipe based on Tergitol 15-S-7. This surfactant is not readily available unless you're associated with a lab or a suitable business. If I'm unable to obtain it, I'll order some Arista Flo instead.


I'm trying to nail down my recipe. I can't get ISA easily (dry country), and I'd like to do a no-rinse method.

Can I use distilled water and the Arista-Flow-Wetting-Agent?

Do have any suggestions? I'll check your other posts, and thanks for the useful info.
 
Kuzma mentioned to me; my emphasis added. Any thoughts?
power control adjustment- most important- full power is too much ( water with minimal ripples)

Full power in what unit? It's kind of an indeterminate comment unless you're talking about a very specific cleaner that might be overpowered, and that has adjustable power.

At higher frequency, say 60khz instead of 40khz, ripples are less pronounced at the surface of the liquid at the same overall power level. The power in a higher frequency unit is more evenly dispersed, with fewer hot spots where too much power is concentrated. This is one of the primary reasons higher frequency units, 60khz or even 80khz, should be preferred over 40khz units, all else being equal.

Regardless, the majority of units that people are using don't have adjustable output power.

The comment about putting 8 records in a bath worries me. That's too many records for the typical 6 liter machine that has three 50 or 60 watt transducers in my opinion.
Good luck,
B B
 
Last edited:
I'm trying to nail down my recipe. I can't get ISA easily (dry country), and I'd like to do a no-rinse method.

Can I use distilled water and the Arista-Flow-Wetting-Agent?

Do have any suggestions? I'll check your other posts, and thanks for the useful info.

The Arista Flow is similar to Photo Flo. It's not a replacement for isopropyl alcohol. If it's me, I wouldn't use much Arista Flow -- a drop or two at most.
Cheers,
B B