Ultrasonic vs rotation wash cleaning machine

[Neverenoughwatches]

Hi mateys, start of the day in the Uk. (Poet but you wouldnt know it). What might be our thoughts on the cleaning efficiency between the two ? Positives, negatives, good or bad experiences with either. An effort to help newies to decide regarding costs and space available. Homemade rotation wash works pretty well might be a cheap alternative to some on a budget. 

[Paul80]

Hi.

I suspect when done properly or dirt loosened with pegwood etc that there is no practical difference between each method.

Personally I use Ultrasonic and my parts come out nice and clean with no sign of any dirt or oil/grease left so cannot see a rotational cleaner doing any better.

Just my 2 pence worth, those who have a rotary cleaner will obviously have a different opinion on the subject

 

 

[RichardHarris123]

Ultrasonic cleaning should be superior to rotational. The cleaning machines give convenient and as discussed many times the cleaning solution makes all the difference. 

1 hour ago, Paul80 said:

Hi.

I suspect when done properly or dirt loosened with pegwood etc that there is no practical difference between each method.

Personally I use Ultrasonic and my parts come out nice and clean with no sign of any dirt or oil/grease left so cannot see a rotational cleaner doing any better.

Just my 2 pence worth, those who have a rotary cleaner will obviously have a different opinion on the subject

 

 

[watchweasol]

Hi   I have both, an Ancient National Ultrasonic where the transducers are cracked and dont function but is still used for rotation cleaning  mainly for clocks and a small ultra sonic for the watch work and have no problem with either.   I use priory polishes clock cleaner (ammoniated) in the national  and IPA in glass jars in the ultrasonic.

[luiazazrambo]

I also have both of them a national watch cleaning machine MK5 and an ultrasonic. I have the feeling that the MK5 only makes the parts wet and useless but I must say that I have not made experiments with different cleaning fluids I am using Elma 1:9 at the moment and I also believe that my baskets are not fit for the purpose because they dont let the fluid flow trough them efficiently. These are the screw-type cleaning baskets where the surface of the sphere are "covered" by the screw and not by the mesh if it makes sense:

 

Plus they tend to roll and I am not sure if that is a good idea.

I put Elma 1:9 in the ultrasonic too and it works a lot better. None of them would remove stubborn dirt though. Ultrasonic also "ruined" one of my old PUW movement by removing the surface treatment of the main plate (nickel or chrome plating). You can also play with the time a little bit having the parts in the ultrasonic too long might not be a good idea. Some say that the manual clean is the best and safest. But of course you can make mistakes with all methods time to time. You also might want to read the threads opened for this topic already on WRT.

[gbyleveldt]

I've been using a US so far and it's been doing it's job, but hell I think a proper watch cleaning machine would be so much more convenient. I just don't have the space in my mancave for one so is possibly the main reason I haven't made work of getting a proper machine. Truth be told, I don't nearly do enough watches to justify a proper machine but then again, all the money I spent on fancy tools so far couldn't be justified either haha.

[Neverenoughwatches]

11 hours ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Hi mateys, start of the day in the Uk. (Poet but you wouldnt know it). What might be our thoughts on the cleaning efficiency between the two ? Positives, negatives, good or bad experiences with either. An effort to help newies to decide regarding costs and space available. Homemade rotation wash works pretty well might be a cheap alternative to some on a budget. 

This seems like ultrasonic may be the better option. General consensus is that there is little to choose from as regards to their cleaning ability. Obvious cost of a US is going to be much cheaper than that of a rotation machine, space taken up in the workshop is also a point for ultrasonic. But US machines are noisy and trying to stay in the same room and work isnt comfortable, suppose ear defenders is an answer to that if you wanted to wear a pair or simply disappear for 15 mins while its running. And also the convenience of having a part drier on a purpose made rotation machine is an extra bonus. Although a simply rig of a 60 watt light bulb under a cheap usb fan has and does a reasonable job of drying. 

8 hours ago, luiazazrambo said:

I also have both of them a national watch cleaning machine MK5 and an ultrasonic. I have the feeling that the MK5 only makes the parts wet and useless but I must say that I have not made experiments with different cleaning fluids I am using Elma 1:9 at the moment and I also believe that my baskets are not fit for the purpose because they dont let the fluid flow trough them efficiently. These are the screw-type cleaning baskets where the surface of the sphere are "covered" by the screw and not by the mesh if it makes sense:

 

Plus they tend to roll and I am not sure if that is a good idea.

I put Elma 1:9 in the ultrasonic too and it works a lot better. None of them would remove stubborn dirt though. Ultrasonic also "ruined" one of my old PUW movement by removing the surface treatment of the main plate (nickel or chrome plating). You can also play with the time a little bit having the parts in the ultrasonic too long might not be a good idea. Some say that the manual clean is the best and safest. But of course you can make mistakes with all methods time to time. You also might want to read the threads opened for this topic already on WRT.

I have same opinion regarding the screw in baskets. They do roll around which i suppose could be considered good for bigger parts and may clean them better. But they are heavy and have too much solid surface that could damage train wheel pivots. I have a couple but stopped using them more or less straight away to prevent delicate part damage. Also noticed plating damage with the US on old cases .

[RichardHarris123]

10 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

This seems like ultrasonic may be the better option. General consensus is that there is little to choose from as regards to their cleaning ability. Obvious cost of a US is going to be much cheaper than that of a rotation machine, space taken up in the workshop is also a point for ultrasonic. But US machines are noisy and trying to stay in the same room and work isnt comfortable, suppose ear defenders is an answer to that if you wanted to wear a pair or simply disappear for 15 mins while its running. And also the convenience of having a part drier on a purpose made rotation machine is an extra bonus. Although a simply rig of a 60 watt light bulb under a cheap usb fan has and does a reasonable job of drying. 

I have same opinion regarding the screw in baskets. They do roll around which i suppose could be considered good for bigger parts and may clean them better. But they are heavy and have too much solid surface that could damage train wheel pivots. I have a couple but stopped using them more or less straight away to prevent delicate part damage. Also noticed plating damage with the US on old cases .

I think plating damage can only occur with loose plating.  The cleaning fluid is getting under it. I'm going to stick with the ultrasonic, buy a better one.  I bought a cheap one to start with, need an upgrade. 

[Neverenoughwatches]

1 hour ago, RichardHarris123 said:

I think plating damage can only occur with loose plating.  The cleaning fluid is getting under it. I'm going to stick with the ultrasonic, buy a better one.  I bought a cheap one to start with, need an upgrade. 

Fatiqued metal on cases is probably best done without the use of a US

[Paul80]

Not got it on my US machine but it is said that having a sweep function is a useful upgrade for US machines, mind you that might be just those who bought the more expensive machine with sweep saying that

[Neverenoughwatches]

 i would hope we are all mature enough not to do that Paul. i have the same problem but i just cant remember how to spell words olo

9 minutes ago, Paul80 said:

Not got it on my US machine but it is said that having a sweep function is a useful upgrade for US machines, mind you that might be just those who bought the more expensive machine with sweep saying that

what is a sweep function matey ?

[RichardHarris123]

6 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

 i would hope we are all mature enough not to do that Paul. i have the same problem but i just cant remember how to spell words olo

what is a sweep function matey ?

Works at different frequencies to eliminate standing waves. Worth it, not sure. 

[Neverenoughwatches]

1 minute ago, RichardHarris123 said:

Works at different frequencies to eliminate standing waves. Worth it, not sure. 

Different alternating frequencies while running ?

[RichardHarris123]

11 minutes ago, Neverenoughwatches said:

Different alternating frequencies while running ?

Yes. A transducer of 40kHz is just the mean value.  It probably works at 38 - 42 kHz, +/- 2 kHz. The transducers are in an array, one of the transducers may have a mean value of 39 kHz or 41 kHz, this can cause hot spots and dead spots in the tank. By alternating the frequencies, it evens this disperency out.

[JGrainger]

Im no expert on this topic but would add that some people stay away from ultrasonic for gilded watch movements.

Tbf, from what I’ve seen, it appears a decent ultrasonic cleaner is a similar price to some of the rotational cleaners in need of a tidy or re-wire.. some time back when the cheap ultrasonic cleaners were introduced at the local Aldi I remember some of the BHI branch members chatting about being able to finally get a cheap efficient cleaner.