A lot of stores have 'pure water' dispensing machines but all I've seen are reverse osmosis units with additional filtering. That removes a lot of stuff from the water but is not DI water. I have access to lab grade DI water for the occasional gallon I need but will check out Whole Foods to see if it is really DI.
Just wondering about an answer to this. I saw the suggestion of a siphon system and I was wondering if anyone has had success with that method. Thanks.
@Hogues — I have an early 60khz Vibrato machine without a drain. When filtering between cleaning sessions, I simply inserted a hose for the intake into the bath - submerging it to the bottom of the tank. The return hose then refilled at the surface. I’ve not had success filtering during cleaning, however, possibly due to flow rate of the pump. Also, I do a preclean prior to US cleaning for the trouble records that would most contaminate the bath. In the end, I’d rather just switch out the solution then constant filtration. I reached a point where the spiral of extra steps and then having to clean the things that clean the thing etc felt like an exercise in madness.... somewhat zen, but numbingly obsessive all the same. YMMV. Cheers.
Checked out my local Whole Foods. Their machine does indeed dispense both RO water and DI water, as well as 'alkaline' water. I have a question into the company that makes the machine to find out how pure the DI is, but unless you have a source of laboratory-grade DI, this is probably as clean as you can easily get. It's good to know. Thanks for pointing that out.
Terrible photo, but here's my new pump & filter setup in action. I need to kludge together a clamp for the output hose, but this works surprisingly well and quietly. Parts list as follows (thanks to someone else here for most of this):
bayite BYT-7A015 DC 12V Solar Hot Water Heater Circulation Pump with DC Power Supply Adapter Low Noise 3M Head 8LPM 2.1GPM - - Amazon.com
Pentek 158110 3/8" #5 Slim Line Clear Filter Housing: Replacement Water Filters: Amazon.com: Industrial & Scientific
Amazon.com: Hydronix SDC-25-0501 NSF Sediment Filter 2.5" OD X 4 7/8" Length, 1 Micron: Industrial & Scientific
Watts SVIG10 Pre-Cut 1/2-Inch Diameter by 3/8-Inch Clear Vinyl Tubing, 10-Foot Length - Plumbing Hoses - Amazon.com
Banjo HB038-90 Polypropylene Hose Fitting, 90 Degree Elbow, 3/8" NPT Male x 3/8" Barbed: Amazon.com: Industrial & Scientific
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AB5WYVC/
Order total with free shipping was about $60. Does the trick! Got a couple of different nozzles from Kohl's and Home Depot since I needed 1/2" into the pump (pump came with 3/8") to match the output nozzle and hose of the tank drain, and the output nozzle from the filter hadn't arrived yet so I got a brass one instead out of impatience.
Once all parts were set, it was maybe 20 minutes to get everything working. Super easy, works great.
I ordered this pump, and the filter with the housing from Amazon, and picked up the rest of the parts from Home Depot.
Works beautifully, and is near silent. Many thanks!
Thanks, CT0wens. I think that I'm just going to clean and dump rather than filter. I like your "spiral of extra steps" comment because that's what I'm fast approaching and I have a suspicion that most of us have been in that position before.
I am building a spreadsheet of parts and part sources for a variety of options and went to BB's version 3 to include that list of parts. The post at My version of an Ultrasonic Record Cleaner speaks of photos and a parts list, attached, but I see no parts list nor images. Can someone point me to the parts list link?
Also, if this works out OK, I'd be happy to post it here. I'm building it as a Google Docs spreadsheet and thought I might consider opening it to editing by the community so that everyone could add their own parts, sources, etc. Maybe add fields or change the structure of the document. It would be an experiment that could go wrong, of course, but I prefer to trust people to do the right thing!
For now, if you know of posts here with parts or even construction information, please let me know by PM and I'll try to include them. Thank you!
Also, if this works out OK, I'd be happy to post it here. I'm building it as a Google Docs spreadsheet and thought I might consider opening it to editing by the community so that everyone could add their own parts, sources, etc. Maybe add fields or change the structure of the document. It would be an experiment that could go wrong, of course, but I prefer to trust people to do the right thing!
For now, if you know of posts here with parts or even construction information, please let me know by PM and I'll try to include them. Thank you!
Hi Carl
Try this link, where I reposted the parts lists after the mods temporarily deleted this whole thread and a lot of the attachments were apparently lost when they resurrected the thread!
Post with BB's Parts Lists
Let me know if you have any trouble.
Cheers,
B B
Try this link, where I reposted the parts lists after the mods temporarily deleted this whole thread and a lot of the attachments were apparently lost when they resurrected the thread!
Post with BB's Parts Lists
Let me know if you have any trouble.
Cheers,
B B
Last edited:
This is a response to Brian's post above.
I used to maintain the local Whole Foods (National Water Service) water machines a few years ago. I did this for many years. They would typically hire local professionals or train store personnel to do the monitoring,cleaning and servicing. The machines were serviced on a weekly basis. The data captured by the local tech would be sent to the central office who would then use that for service decisions. They maintained strong control of maintenance decisions. They were quite good about providing needed supplies to the field tech in a timely basis. Their interest was to maintain a quality service for their customer (Whole Foods) and WF's customers.
Your best bet for record cleaning is to use the DI water. The machines at WF take the water first treated by reverse osmosis and then send it through a DI "polishing" tank which makes it a very high quality water. The RO process removes a large proportion (95%?) of the contaminants from the city water. It removes the "hot button" contaminants like chlorine, rust, fluoride , pharmas and such from the water and is probably the largest seller. The DI is preferred by those who want everything that is not water removed. The difference between RO and DI really depends on the local city water. Water primarily from mountain snow melt is already pretty pure and does not have much to remove. Water from a well source has a lot of non water stuff in it. Even a high percentage removal of a large number means that a lot still remains in the water. This is where the DI process makes the largest difference.
The alkaline water thing is new since I did service on the machines. I suspect that the RO water is run through a remineralizing cartridge (marble chips) that changes the PH of the water. This is not water you want for record cleaning, it will definitely leave spots on the cleaned records.
You might want to get some sort of TDS (total dissoved solids) tester to test the water before buying it. The closer to zero the meter reads, the purer the water is. The little pocket testers are inexpensive and accurate enough for this purpose.
John
I used to maintain the local Whole Foods (National Water Service) water machines a few years ago. I did this for many years. They would typically hire local professionals or train store personnel to do the monitoring,cleaning and servicing. The machines were serviced on a weekly basis. The data captured by the local tech would be sent to the central office who would then use that for service decisions. They maintained strong control of maintenance decisions. They were quite good about providing needed supplies to the field tech in a timely basis. Their interest was to maintain a quality service for their customer (Whole Foods) and WF's customers.
Your best bet for record cleaning is to use the DI water. The machines at WF take the water first treated by reverse osmosis and then send it through a DI "polishing" tank which makes it a very high quality water. The RO process removes a large proportion (95%?) of the contaminants from the city water. It removes the "hot button" contaminants like chlorine, rust, fluoride , pharmas and such from the water and is probably the largest seller. The DI is preferred by those who want everything that is not water removed. The difference between RO and DI really depends on the local city water. Water primarily from mountain snow melt is already pretty pure and does not have much to remove. Water from a well source has a lot of non water stuff in it. Even a high percentage removal of a large number means that a lot still remains in the water. This is where the DI process makes the largest difference.
The alkaline water thing is new since I did service on the machines. I suspect that the RO water is run through a remineralizing cartridge (marble chips) that changes the PH of the water. This is not water you want for record cleaning, it will definitely leave spots on the cleaned records.
You might want to get some sort of TDS (total dissoved solids) tester to test the water before buying it. The closer to zero the meter reads, the purer the water is. The little pocket testers are inexpensive and accurate enough for this purpose.
John
John,
Thanks for the comments. I contacted National Water Service and they were quick on their reply. My conclusion from their comments is that the the level of "DI-ness" will vary somewhat and is not as good as what you would find in a laboratory setup. Laboratory DI systems monitor the water by measuring resistivity -- the less ions, the higher the resistivity -- but is not done on the systems in the WF stores. Still, it appears to be the best readily available source of 'pure' water for record cleaning or other hobby tasks that need DI water. The price is also right.
The alkaline water is definitely not something to use for record cleaning as you point out. I'm not sure what health benefit it has -- what benefit do you gain by pouring alkaline water into your stomach that has a highly acidic pH (1.5 - 3.5), though that discussion is definitely OT for this thread!
I'm glad to know that DI water is available over-the-counter in my neighborhood.
Thanks for the comments. I contacted National Water Service and they were quick on their reply. My conclusion from their comments is that the the level of "DI-ness" will vary somewhat and is not as good as what you would find in a laboratory setup. Laboratory DI systems monitor the water by measuring resistivity -- the less ions, the higher the resistivity -- but is not done on the systems in the WF stores. Still, it appears to be the best readily available source of 'pure' water for record cleaning or other hobby tasks that need DI water. The price is also right.
The alkaline water is definitely not something to use for record cleaning as you point out. I'm not sure what health benefit it has -- what benefit do you gain by pouring alkaline water into your stomach that has a highly acidic pH (1.5 - 3.5), though that discussion is definitely OT for this thread!
I'm glad to know that DI water is available over-the-counter in my neighborhood.
At this point, I've cleaned many hundreds of records on three different ultrasonic machines. Here are some observations, and comments, some where I would like feedback from the community.
All USC are 10L. Two are Beijing Ultrasonic machines, an 80kHz and 40kHz units with variable output control. One is a Vibrato 80kHz machine.
The drain holes in the bottom of the BU machines are on the right, above the tank drain valve. In the 80kHz machine, the tank bottom hole is 1" in diameter, an open hole. In the 40kHz machine the hole has a perforated round plate over it, with a handful of small holes. The Vibrato has the drain hole on the left, a bit off center, with the drain valve on the right. The drain hole is 1/4" in diameter.
My assembly processes the cleaning solution through a 0.35 micron Max Flow - Pentek filter system, circulated with a Sicce pump, rated at 170 gallon per hour. I've measured the pump volume at closer to 70 gallons per hour so the filter system slows circulation. Still, in theory a complete turnover for 2.5 gallons of solution is about 2 minutes.
In all tanks, I've experimented with placement of the filtered cleaning solution return line. I have tried the left rear, near the tank bottom, and on the right rear at the liquid line.
The initial cleaning solution I use is essentially 2.5 gallons (~10L) of distilled water, 300 ml of 99% IPA, and 13 ml of Ilfotol. As we know, you quickly lose track of the precise chemistry of the solution because the act of cleaning records removes some liquid from the system. Furthermore, evaporation of both water and IPA is ongoing even when the tank is covered while not in use. I heat the liquid to 27-30°C for a run and heat accelerates evaporation. By use of a specific gravity bulb, I am able to keep the alcohol content near 2.5 to 3.0 percent of solution. I have no idea how Ilfotol behaves in the solution. Does it concentrate or is some lost to evaporation along with water and alcohol?
After cleaning 100 to 150 records, I dump the solution and start with a new batch.
On a Vinyl Stack, I clean 4 records in a session, ~20 minutes in duration, but only 25 percent of the record is submerged. Given rotational speed, second to the slowest, I calculate the maximum US exposure is less than 7 minutes.
To dry records, I put the Vinyl Stack record holder on a drying rack, with the records vertical, then turn on a computer equipment cooling fan to push air between them until they are completely dry.
In the Vibrato 80kHz and the 40kHz BU machine, I get light-colored or white deposits on the forced air-dried records. Mostly those deposits occur as a very thin 'tide line' for the lack of a better description, on the right side of records. The right side is where records rotate out of the cleaning solution. Mostly, the line occurs on the stack end records, those two on the outside. Sometimes the only place with a tide line is on the outside facing side of the lp, other times both the inside and outside of that half of the record gets a debris line. On rarer occasions, I see a small packet (1 to 2 mm) of debris of the same color elsewhere on the record surface.
I've learned that to have the return line near the surface on the right side of the Vinyl Stack minimizes deposition of the light colored tide line. But it does not eliminate it.
This white line and isolated spots of debris I remove with a blast from a compressed air canister.
On the BU 80kHz USC I never got a tide line or spots of debris. Remember that tank had a monster sized exit hole. But I did not measure the circulation rate while I still had the machine.
The debris I believe is paper and other floater debris that does not sink in the tank, but instead resides on the surface where it can be redeposited. I do not know why that did not occur in the BU 80kHz USC, except that perhaps the return flow in that tank due to the larger exit hole was much closer to 170 gallons per hour.
Like many of you, I allow 15 minutes to degas and I circulate the cleaning solution via the pump-filter set up during that time. I've learned that I cannot immediately clean a second batch of records; I must circulate the cleaning solution for 15 to 20 minutes to minimize the tide line effect. If I were to use an aquarium skimmer net, I believe I could clean the next batch almost immediately. Plan to get one soon.
Has anyone experienced anything similar to my observations?
All USC are 10L. Two are Beijing Ultrasonic machines, an 80kHz and 40kHz units with variable output control. One is a Vibrato 80kHz machine.
The drain holes in the bottom of the BU machines are on the right, above the tank drain valve. In the 80kHz machine, the tank bottom hole is 1" in diameter, an open hole. In the 40kHz machine the hole has a perforated round plate over it, with a handful of small holes. The Vibrato has the drain hole on the left, a bit off center, with the drain valve on the right. The drain hole is 1/4" in diameter.
My assembly processes the cleaning solution through a 0.35 micron Max Flow - Pentek filter system, circulated with a Sicce pump, rated at 170 gallon per hour. I've measured the pump volume at closer to 70 gallons per hour so the filter system slows circulation. Still, in theory a complete turnover for 2.5 gallons of solution is about 2 minutes.
In all tanks, I've experimented with placement of the filtered cleaning solution return line. I have tried the left rear, near the tank bottom, and on the right rear at the liquid line.
The initial cleaning solution I use is essentially 2.5 gallons (~10L) of distilled water, 300 ml of 99% IPA, and 13 ml of Ilfotol. As we know, you quickly lose track of the precise chemistry of the solution because the act of cleaning records removes some liquid from the system. Furthermore, evaporation of both water and IPA is ongoing even when the tank is covered while not in use. I heat the liquid to 27-30°C for a run and heat accelerates evaporation. By use of a specific gravity bulb, I am able to keep the alcohol content near 2.5 to 3.0 percent of solution. I have no idea how Ilfotol behaves in the solution. Does it concentrate or is some lost to evaporation along with water and alcohol?
After cleaning 100 to 150 records, I dump the solution and start with a new batch.
On a Vinyl Stack, I clean 4 records in a session, ~20 minutes in duration, but only 25 percent of the record is submerged. Given rotational speed, second to the slowest, I calculate the maximum US exposure is less than 7 minutes.
To dry records, I put the Vinyl Stack record holder on a drying rack, with the records vertical, then turn on a computer equipment cooling fan to push air between them until they are completely dry.
In the Vibrato 80kHz and the 40kHz BU machine, I get light-colored or white deposits on the forced air-dried records. Mostly those deposits occur as a very thin 'tide line' for the lack of a better description, on the right side of records. The right side is where records rotate out of the cleaning solution. Mostly, the line occurs on the stack end records, those two on the outside. Sometimes the only place with a tide line is on the outside facing side of the lp, other times both the inside and outside of that half of the record gets a debris line. On rarer occasions, I see a small packet (1 to 2 mm) of debris of the same color elsewhere on the record surface.
I've learned that to have the return line near the surface on the right side of the Vinyl Stack minimizes deposition of the light colored tide line. But it does not eliminate it.
This white line and isolated spots of debris I remove with a blast from a compressed air canister.
On the BU 80kHz USC I never got a tide line or spots of debris. Remember that tank had a monster sized exit hole. But I did not measure the circulation rate while I still had the machine.
The debris I believe is paper and other floater debris that does not sink in the tank, but instead resides on the surface where it can be redeposited. I do not know why that did not occur in the BU 80kHz USC, except that perhaps the return flow in that tank due to the larger exit hole was much closer to 170 gallons per hour.
Like many of you, I allow 15 minutes to degas and I circulate the cleaning solution via the pump-filter set up during that time. I've learned that I cannot immediately clean a second batch of records; I must circulate the cleaning solution for 15 to 20 minutes to minimize the tide line effect. If I were to use an aquarium skimmer net, I believe I could clean the next batch almost immediately. Plan to get one soon.
Has anyone experienced anything similar to my observations?
Last edited:
Bend,
Compressed air can be a bad idea for vinyl LPs. The propellants used in those cans come out with the "air" and are sometimes things that aren't really compatible with PVC (e.g. butane), or things like Freon 134, that haven't been adequately tested for chemical compatibility with PVC.
I suggest rinsing off the floater line with distilled water or the filtered cleaning solution coming back into the tank via your return line from your filter to the tank. I just pick up that line and rinse off any floaters that remain on the vinyl.
Cheers,
B B
I posted some questions and am asking the DIYAudio Ultrasonic Vinyl Cleaning community for input in the Vendors Bazaar here:
Ultrasonic Record Cleaning
I would greatly appreciate any comments!
-Louis
Ultrasonic Record Cleaning
I would greatly appreciate any comments!
-Louis
Hello everyone. Inspired by this thread, I built a cleaner with a used Whaledent ultrasonic (60khz) I found cheap on ebay. The build is quite utilitarian (built my mount out of LEGO, no filter, etc), but I've used it to clean approx. 4000 records over the past few years, and its been working fantastically.
Unfortunately my motor recently died and I'm having a hell of a time finding an replacement.
Does anyone know a source that has appropriate motors in stock? I'm looking for 10-20 minutes per rotation
I've just spent the past 2 hours searching through this massive thread but every link i click seems to be out of stock.
Thanks in advance
Unfortunately my motor recently died and I'm having a hell of a time finding an replacement.
Does anyone know a source that has appropriate motors in stock? I'm looking for 10-20 minutes per rotation
I've just spent the past 2 hours searching through this massive thread but every link i click seems to be out of stock.
Thanks in advance
Hi Spyre
Please post a picture of your Lego setup. Would love to see that.
Did you try calling Herbach and Rademan for motors?
You can make an offer on some of this seller's RPH motors:
Synchron 610 6RPH 110V Pear Shape Gearbox Motor | eBay
Cheers,
B B
Please post a picture of your Lego setup. Would love to see that.
Did you try calling Herbach and Rademan for motors?
You can make an offer on some of this seller's RPH motors:
Synchron 610 6RPH 110V Pear Shape Gearbox Motor | eBay
Cheers,
B B
Very interesting post - thanks.
From this, I assume you don't run your filter & pump during the cleaning cycle?
I have been doing this - as I didn't know I shouldn't.
Can you tell me why it isn't a good idea to run the pump whilst cleaning?
Thanks,
Andrew
Hi Andrew,
I think it's fine to run your pump and filter while cleaning. I've done this with no cleaning problems.
The only thing to watch for is your pump's duty rating. If it's not rated at 100% duty cycle for example, you can't run it continuously. You need to give it time to cool down to prevent overheating. Also, there really is no need to run it continuously to keep the bath clean. I tend to run the pump / filter during LP changeover, and let it rest during cleaning cycle. But flipping the on/off cycle would be fine too.
B B
I think it's fine to run your pump and filter while cleaning. I've done this with no cleaning problems.
The only thing to watch for is your pump's duty rating. If it's not rated at 100% duty cycle for example, you can't run it continuously. You need to give it time to cool down to prevent overheating. Also, there really is no need to run it continuously to keep the bath clean. I tend to run the pump / filter during LP changeover, and let it rest during cleaning cycle. But flipping the on/off cycle would be fine too.
B B
From this, I assume you don't run your filter & pump during the cleaning cycle?
I have been doing this - as I didn't know I shouldn't.
Can you tell me why it isn't a good idea to run the pump whilst cleaning?
Thanks,
Andrew
Thanks, BB.
So can I assume that if I can quite happily leave my fingers on the pump without them feeling hot … my pump must be working within its duty cycle?
I had read somewhere that the flow of water through the tank whilst the US units were 'On' reduced the effectiveness of the ultrasonic cleaning action?
Which would suggest that the optimum scenario is to do what you're doing … run the pump through the LP changeover period … and switch it off during the cleaning cycle!
Regards,
Andy