Interesting All-in-One Ultrasonic Cleaner - HumminGuru

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by Joe Spivey, Dec 4, 2020.

  1. LP808

    LP808 Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Netherlands
    I see that there is only 14 hours left.... so if you are still considering....make up your mind FAST ;-)
     
  2. Bieske

    Bieske Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Netherlands
    Added air filter, but especially water filter is very nice.
     
  3. Have they stated what frequency the ultrasonic operates at? I know this was discussed earlier in the thread but I don’t see anything specific to the HumminGuru.

    Edit: Oops I just found this on their site:

    Applying a duo 40 kHz ultrasonic system is powerful enough to remove the contaminants and dust on the vinyl record without causing damage. Because the application for the cleaning is vinyl chloride, there is not much difference between 40 kHz and 60 kHz ultrasonic system in terms of cleaning effectiveness.
     
  4. meadorbd

    meadorbd Well-Known Member

    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Six hours left and they are just over $5k from unlocking the 10" insert. Fingers crossed.
     
    Rupe33 likes this.
  5. LP808

    LP808 Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Netherlands
    Rupe33 and gabbleratchet7 like this.
  6. Rupe33

    Rupe33 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Silver Spring, MD
    Bieske, LP808 and gabbleratchet7 like this.
  7. Newguy444

    Newguy444 Forum Resident

    Location:
    New york
    Looks promising but I will wait until its released (if ever) and for the reviews. Even if the retail price goes up a bit ot will have been worth the piece of mind.

    I have a vc-s and while it's fine, it's a time consuming manual intensive pain in the ass. Putting in a record and walking away is very appealing but not for a $3k degritter
     
  8. Newguy444

    Newguy444 Forum Resident

    Location:
    New york
    Sorry if this has already been answered, but is there a definitive take on whether 40 khz is as good/better/worse than a 120khz US record cleaner, and why?
     
  9. Leonthepro

    Leonthepro Skeptically Optimistic Autodidact Debater

    Location:
    Sweden
    Nothing definitive. It just means smaller, more gentle bubbles. Those who worry about there somehow being damage feel better about it, but it should also mean less effective cleaning I suppose, nothing tested though.
     
  10. Newguy444

    Newguy444 Forum Resident

    Location:
    New york
    So is the theory that cleaning is more effective at 40 or 120?
     
  11. vinylsolution

    vinylsolution Forum Resident

    Location:
    Denver, CO, USA
    I wrote to an engineer sort of guy in 2014 with the frequency question:

    Good morning and thank you for your interest in xyz ultrasonic cleaning systems for cleaning vinyl LP records.
    60kHz would be an acceptable frequency for this application, but if xyz were manufacturing it, we would provide 80kHz due to its more
    evenly-distributed energy distribution, and less damage potential.

    Unfortunately, we do not sell a system dedicated to LP cleaning as those I have seen. The rotation in these systems is a very good idea, since it
    keeps the object in motion and aids in damage prevention.
    At 80kHz, the LP could be cleaned stationary, with intermittent rotation by hand, and I have heard of others doing this to reduce the cost.
    I always try to remember my turntable and listening setup is not inside a sterile cleanroom, so while pursuing really darn clean vinyl is noble, the fact is your efforts are likely going to be more undone by 'dust' that will fall setting the clean LP on the table, than the matter of ultrasonic frequency used to have just cleaned it.

    Of course, YMMV.
     
  12. Leonthepro

    Leonthepro Skeptically Optimistic Autodidact Debater

    Location:
    Sweden
    As I said, no one knows.
     
  13. Joe Spivey

    Joe Spivey Your friendly neighborhood Spivey-Man Thread Starter

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    How is 40 kHz bubbles more gentle than other frequencies?
     
  14. Leonthepro

    Leonthepro Skeptically Optimistic Autodidact Debater

    Location:
    Sweden
    120KHZ is.
     
    Joe Spivey likes this.
  15. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    There are a number of definitive test results from industry and here is a quick summary:

    1. Power to cause Cavitation is proportional to kHz: 40kHz requires less power than 120 kHz.

    2. Cavitation Intensity is proportional to kHz & power (& tank size): 40kHz can have twice the cavitation intensity of 120 kHz. For power this is the point when any more power does not increase cavitation intensity.

    3. Particle Removal: >2-5 microns 40khz is more efficient. <2-5 microns 120 kHz is more efficient.

    4. Cleanliness Level: The higher kHz units can achieve a cleaner surface but that that does not mean they clean all surfaces. If the surface is really dirty - you need the lower kHz.

    5. Tank flow rate: If the tank flow >50% of the tank volume cavitation intensity drops.

    The HumminGuru has pro's & con's. The very small tank volume is not going to need much power to get good cavitation intensity. But too much power and with the low kHz, there could be the risk of damage; and the that small tank volume can heat fast. Given the cost & size, - the risk of too much power is probably very low. However, with the record spinning, even slowly, its agitating the fluid and given the likely low power, there is risk of reduced cavitation intensity caused by the record agitating the fluid as it rotates. With only a tank volume of 350 mL, if agitation (equivalent flow rate) = 175 mL/min develops, cavitation intensity will drop. The Degritter in comparison has a tank volume of 1400 mL, so the risk of record rotation causing enough agitation (700 mL/min) to cause too much equivalent flow is much less.
     
  16. Ripblade

    Ripblade Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Six
    Is there an ideal rotation rate for a single record in a 6L tank operating at 40kHz?
     
  17. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    I have been playing with some numbers to try to bound that question and came-up with the following thumb-rule; 1 rpm = 1 lpm equivalent flow for each record and do not exceed a flow rate >50% of the tank volume/min. The derivation is as follows:

    1. Assume 0.333% of the record is in contact with the fluid and by a calculation the record (minus label) per side is 1-ft², so at any time 0.67-ft² are in contact with the fluid.

    2. Assume that as the record rotates, it will agitate a film of fluid 0.25-inch thick on each side. Therefore, as the record rotates, the volume of water that is agitated = (0.67-ft²)(144-in²/ft²)(0.5-in) = 48.25-in³ = 0.8 mL.

    3. However, the faster the rotation, the more fluid is moved because of drag, so a 25% factor is applied for uncertainty to yield a simple thumb-rule that the rotating record is agitating/moving 1 liter of fluid; and a rotating speed of 1-rpm = 1-lpm.

    So, for a single record in a 6-L tank, the maximum speed for 50% tank flow is (6-L)(0.5)/(1 record)(1 lpm/rpm) = 3.0 rpm. The more records you clean at once, the slower the speed you need and/or a larger tank.

    Remember, this a ball-park estimate - there's no computational fluid dynamic analysis, but if you take the above thumb-rule and you apply it to the well designed system such as the Kuzma™ RD Kit which is is often used with the Elmasonic™ P 120-H ultrasonic tank that has a volume of 12.75 liters and can clean 10 records at a time: Apply the thumb-rule 1 rpm = 1 lpm, the maximum speed for 50% tank flow is (12.75L)(0.5)/(10 records)(1 lpm/rpm) = 0.64 rpm which is right at the maximum speed (0.6 rpm) of the Kuzma™ RD Kit. So, the derivation and use of the thumb-rule 1 rpm = 1 lpm appears reasonable and its independent of kHz.

    The above info will be included in the 2nd edition of my paper.
     
    scarfaceclaw, captouch and Ripblade like this.
  18. Ripblade

    Ripblade Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Six
    Thanks, pacvr.
     
  19. Ripblade

    Ripblade Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Six
    Have you published the paper yet?
     
  20. pacvr

    pacvr Forum Resident

    Location:
    Maryland
    Read the article Precision Aqueous Cleaning of Vinyl Records-2nd Edition - The Vinyl Press and then click on the big red download button (at 145 pages, its more of a book; lots of info). The info I addressed above is in Chapter XIV which is exclusive to ultrasonic units. If you read with Adobe, there is a document tree and the 'book' is cross-linked throughout for all references and for Chapters, paragraphs, tables and figures.
     
    gabbleratchet7 and Ripblade like this.
  21. Ripblade

    Ripblade Forum Resident

    Location:
    The Six
    Thank-you!
     
  22. P1G30N

    P1G30N Active Member

    Location:
    Montreal
    Jesus. Dunno if it’s a mistake or what, but pre-order just went live at 2.9K for the base package, and 3.3K with the 7” and 10” adaptors. Are they kidding?
     
  23. Vinyl Archaeologist

    Vinyl Archaeologist Forum Resident

    I think that’s Hong Kong currency
     
    JorgeGvb likes this.
  24. bajaed

    bajaed Forum Resident

    Geez, hope so!
     
  25. jimhb

    jimhb Forum Resident

    Location:
    Denver, CO, USA
    So it is around $500 shipped to the US?
     
    JorgeGvb likes this.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine