Clean, green and lean: Turning Performance

When it comes to parts washing, there’s more than one way to “go green.” One way to perform environmentally friendly parts washing is by replacing technologies that release volatile organic compounds and objectionable solvents with aqueous-based ultrasonic cleaning. High-pressure water cleaning can also be used.

Another approach focuses on eliminating elaborate and outdated centralized wash systems. In addition to being easier on the environment, approaches like these support lean operations that save money and improve operating efficiency.

Centralized wash systems that are capable of cleaning every type of contamination from every department are increasingly outdated, according to John Carson, marketing manager for Guyson Corp. of USA, Saratoga Springs, N.Y., a manufacturer of industrial cleaning and surface finishing machinery. “They would plunk this multistage cleaning system in the middle of a factory and then everybody would haul parts to the central parts washer, wait in line until the parts ran through and then bring them back to the next stage of operation,” he said. That increases the amount of time value isn’t being added to parts, adds to the work-in-process inventory and wastes energy transporting pallets of parts back and forth.

A better approach is to use a simpler, more energy-efficient system sized for a work cell. That cleaner has features and applies cleaning chemistries appropriate for handling what’s required in a specific work cell, such as removing cutting fluid before the parts travel, possibly via conveyor, to the next department or operation.

Courtesy of Guyson

The 24-sq.-ft. footprint of an indexing rotary parts washer from Guyson Corp. is sized for a work cell. It incorporates two spray washing stations and two drying stations.

He called the work cell-based system a “lean” approach to parts cleaning where the parts are cleaned only as needed. “With a lean approach, the parts are essentially pretty darn clean all along,” Carson said, “but they’re not necessarily as clean as they’ll be in the final stages.”

In addition, waste is reduced by using only the energy necessary for specific cleaning requirements. “It’s very wasteful to be cleaning beyond what is needed for the next step because it’s going to have to be repeated after that guy dirties the parts again,” Carson said. For almost every manufacturing step, there’s some type of contamination that must be removed before the part can be considered finished, he added.

Although operational savings from a work-cell approach can be substantial, the equipment cost for a centralized or decentralized system may be similar. “The lean guy may still be spending $200,000 on his parts cleaning,” Carson said, “but he might spend $40,000 at a whack in five different locations.”

The savings from reduced labor, work-in-process inventory and parts transportation is not lost on manufacturers seeking to cut costs. “We see fewer and fewer examples of the old-fashioned methods of cleaning and more of the work cell-based, or leaner, approach,” Carson said. “People can’t afford to do it the old way and, frankly, it’s not justifiable.”

Replacing Solvents

Parts washing chemistries are also available for replacing undesirable cleaning solvents, such as synthetic and petroleum-based ones, that a federal agency or the manufacturer itself has deemed unhealthy for the environment, workers or both. “It’s hard to know what solvents are being used, as many are outlawed each year, and every area of the country varies,” said Frank Pedeflous, owner of Omegasonics, Simi Valley, Calif. His company produces ultrasonic parts washers and about 40 different water-based soaps for use in ultrasonic systems, with the application dictating the appropriate soap.

Pedeflous noted that parts manufacturers generally require an alkaline soap with a pH in the high 10s to the middle 11s or an enzyme cleaner that eats oil and digests it off as carbon dioxide. The alkaline soap is not caustic enough to scar aluminum and generate bright spots on part surfaces, and so it is not an aggressive cleaner. For shops machining a lot of aluminum, he recommends the enzyme cleaner, which has a pH in the middle 8s. Although an aggressive cleaner will not damage stainless steel and titanium parts, such a soap is usually not needed because the primary cleaning task is removing cutting oils, which doesn’t require aggressiveness, according to Pedeflous.

When parts, such as medical implants, require passivation, which protects against rusting and corrosion, they receive a citric acid bath to remove free iron particles from their surfaces because the metals typically used to make those parts, including titanium and stainless steel, have a minute amount of iron ore in them. Any residue from cutting tools must also be removed during passivation. Passivation with citric acid, which has a pH from 2.8 to 3.2, generally follows an alkaline soap treatment to remove cutting fluids and one or two water rinses to remove soap residue.

The citric acid also removes surface rust, according to Pedeflous. “That shines metal surfaces,” he said, noting that water-based glycolic acid, which has a pH similar to the citrus solution, also removes surface rust.

Courtesy of Omegasonics

Instead of scrubbing and washing parts, potentially missing hard-to-reach cracks and crevices, a worker can place the parts in an ultrasonic parts washer, flip a switch and perform other jobs.

Another water-based alkaline cleaner is available from Dylon Industries Inc., Cleveland. Technical data from Dylon states that the company’s recently developed Grade CL-1001 cleaner/degreaser’s chemical constituents are a blend of surfactants and nonpetroleum solvent. “It’s based on natural oils, actually,” said John Kondilas, the company’s director of technology. “There is no chlorine in the material.”

According to the company, the biodegradable, nonflammable cleaning agent is a concentrated formula and must be diluted with water to enable maximum cleaning action. The ratio ranges from 1:100 for scrubbing floors to up to 1:50 for use in pressure sprayers and power washers to 1:20 for cleaning smoke, soot and machine exteriors to 1:5 for removing cutting oil and use in ultrasonic tanks.

The cleaner has a pH use level of 11 to 12 and can be rinsed off with water. “It helps break down oils with its alkaline nature and doesn’t attack steels,” Kondilas said. “And it’s not going to cause corrosive action on dies or the work environment.”

Although the degreaser itself is environmentally friendly, Kondilas noted that it emulsifies and contains the material being cleaned. “If you have nasty oils and greases in there, they are going to be emulsified and you must have those removed in accordance with any environmental laws,” he said. “It doesn’t take nasty materials and make them friendly.”

Petroleum-based solvents have their supporters, but the growth of water-based parts cleaners appears to be rising because they can improve workplace safety while saving manufacturers some green. “Metalworking industry people want to get away from solvents because of the fire hazards and the fumes that go along with solvent-based cleaners,” Kondilas said. He added that “CL-1001 has the capability to lower operational costs, if nothing else because you dilute it with water, so it has to be more cost-effective [than petroleum-based solvents].”

Hi-Fi Cleaning

The equipment used to apply water-based cleaners varies based on numerous factors, including the need to reduce labor and part complexity. “You’re not having laborers scrubbing parts by hand,” Omegasonics’ Pedeflous said of ultrasonic cleaners. “The machine is doing that work so you’re not tying up valuable resources to do cleaning, especially if you’ve got blind-holes that you can’t get to no matter what tools you’re using. That’s where the ultrasound works so well because it can go into those areas and pull from the inside out.”

Cleaning is achieved by the vacuum sound bubbles an ultrasonic machine produces using an ultrasonic generator, or amplifier, and a transducer, or speaker. “It’s a lot like a stereo speaker in water,” Pedeflous said. “We’re just oscillating transducers within a water bath to create sound bubbles.”

In addition to the type of soap used, the output frequency needs to be appropriate for the job at hand. The higher the frequency, the smaller and more numerous the bubbles. Most industrial part cleaning applications are done at 40kHz, or 40,000 cycles per second. This means an ultrasonic tank creates 40,000 microscopic cleaning bubbles per second per transducer. For heavy items or highly contaminated items, a 20kHz to 25kHz output frequency might be appropriate because it creates bigger, stronger bubbles, but fewer of them.

On the other extreme, higher output frequencies, such as 68kHz or even 178kHz or higher, are suitable for cleaning debris smaller than a micron from parts. Those include medical and electronics applications, such as disk drives. “I wouldn’t use, as an example, a high frequency to clean an injection mold because I’m not going to get enough energy to do a good, thorough job,” Pedeflous said. “It may take a lot longer or I may just never get it done.”

Ultrasonic equipment manufacturers can build a tank with more than one frequency, such as 40kHz and 68kHz, but a user couldn’t operate between those at, say, 50kHz. However, Pedeflous said most will provide a sweep frequency, such as one that sweeps back and forth from 39,000 to 41,000 cycles per second, to eliminate standing waves for optimal cleaning performance.

The tank temperature and the time parts remain exposed to ultrasound are additional variables. The appropriate temperature is a function of the cleaning chemistry, because different chemistries break down at different temperatures. “The enzyme cleaner is something we generally don’t like to see go above 130° F because then it’s not as active,” Pedeflous said, noting that most applications are in the 130° to 150° F range.