Cleaning or Polishing Balls

[dr_dave]

WPA sanctioned events specify:

All balls must be composed of cast phenolic resin plastic and measure 2 ¼ (+.005) inches [5.715 cm (+ .127 mm)] in diameter and weigh 5 ½ to 6 oz [156 to 170 gms].

Balls should be unpolished, and should also not be waxed.

Balls should be cleaned with a towel or cloth free of dirt and dust, and may also be washed with soap and water.

Balls contaminated with any slippery substance - treated with a polishing or rubbing compound and/or waxed - must be cleansed and dewaxed with a clean cloth moistened with diluted alcohol before play.

Cleaning pool balls with rubbing alcohol is a terrible idea (unless it is followed up by a secondary cleaning with something else) ... it can dramatically increase the typical amount of throw. For more info, see the video and articles on the ball cleaning and surface treatment resource page.

Those ball-cleaning rules need to be updated.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Cleaning pool balls with rubbing alcohol is a terrible idea (unless it is followed up by a secondary cleaning with something else) ... it can dramatically increase the typical amount of throw. For more info, see the video and articles on the ball cleaning and surface treatment resource page.

Those ball-cleaning rules need to be updated.

Regards,
Dave

Have you consulted a chemist about what may be at play with the alcohol? I doubt it is adding anything to the ball unless it is very impure (highly unlikely), and phenolic resin is supposed to be a pretty inert substance, so I don't think a mild solvent like isopropanol is going to etch the ball surface or damage it in any other way. Is it possible that the alcohol is merely removing something from the ball that wasn't meant to be there in the first place? Like the wax from the ball cleaner used previously?

BTW I'm not trying to go all "English!" here, I genuinely want to know.

 

[dr_dave]

Have you consulted a chemist about what may be at play with the alcohol? I doubt it is adding anything to the ball unless it is very impure (highly unlikely), and phenolic resin is supposed to be a pretty inert substance, so I don't think a mild solvent like isopropanol is going to etch the ball surface or damage it in any other way. Is it possible that the alcohol is merely removing something from the ball that wasn't meant to be there in the first place? Like the wax from the ball cleaner used previously?

BTW I'm not trying to go all "English!" here, I genuinely want to know.

Thank you for not agreeing to not "go all English!" on me. That makes it easier and more pleasant to respond. :grin-square:

See the 2nd article on the resource page, where I address this topic some:

"Throw Follow-up: Part II: More Results" (BD, August, 2014).

I think pool balls from the manufacturer, or after cleaning with typically recommended products, or after handling by people, have a residue on them that is fairly consistent and persistent that results in a "typical" amount of throw (what players expect). I think the alcohol (and other aggressive cleaners) strip everything from the balls, exposing squeaky-clean resin surfaces that result in more throw than people expect.

Again, check out the video and articles. They summarize pretty much everything I know on the topic.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Texas Carom Club]

I cleaned both my sets last night with le magnifique, by tiger
seemed to add a bit of polish to it like my new set still has, I like it so far

and got a micro fiber cloth to clean the chalk from them by hand

 

[Bavafongoul]

It looks like I am in the minority about the issue as I see it ....permissible....allowable.....variations in the weight of every individual object ball and the cue ball itself......up to 1/2 oz difference.

We all know about the differences in play a cue ball can make by switching from a measles ball to a red dot ball, etc. Well, what about a 9 ball that weighs 5.55 ozs and a 10 ball that weighs 5.98 ozs and so on.

I submit that the tolerances are way too generous and that mismatched weights of the balls in a set play very differently than weights that are close.......I weigh my pool balls every 3-4 months (3x annually) on my gun powder scale. I rotate a new set into play every 18 months and sell my used set of Centennials...this way all my pool balls have matched weights all the time.

I'd be interested in reading whether anyone else thinks the permissible weight difference is an issue. I think every tournament should use the same cue balls.......not a red circle in some and a measles in another or a red dot, or blue dot or no dot cue balls.......players have favorite cue balls.....wanna draw the cue ball like it was a yo-yo, then use a red dot cue ball.....12 grams lighter. I think every tournament should use the same type cue balls which is probably an impossibility as much as hoping for similar weights in the "all of the pool balls".

Matt B.

 

[3kushn]

Well, that's what the Aramith ball restorer is for, isn't it? Use it and then rinse off the residue with a mild soap (not a detergent) to my way of thinking.

The point is that the Aramith cleaner does contain wax, a substance that is against the rules (and isn't such a good idea anyway). Do you believe it's some special kind of wax that was formulated just for phenolic billiard balls? I don't. It's 99.9% likely that it's just plain old cheap carnauba... which is automobile wax.

Mr SP Bob Jewett is correct. If all you want is a clean sterile germ free surface then fine use soap and water. If you want the smooth shiny surface of a new ball you MUST use an abrasive. There is no other way. This is why body shop products have abrasives for removal of micro scratches in your clear coat.

Polishing Compound (not Rubbing Compound)
Plastic Restorer Products
3M Finessit is a good one.
and of course Aramith products.

I do wish they took out the wax in the cleaner. It probably sells better with it in there.
The difference between the Restorer and Cleaner is the amount and maybe grit size contained. It appears that the grit breaks down quickly acting finer and finer the longer you're cleaning each ball. I use both and I clean after about 1 or 2 hours of play. Why I have 5 sets. Of 3. Another reason to play 3Cushion.

Putting Wax on the balls makes them slide. At least until it gets rubbed off by the chalk impregnated cloth. 45 minutes?? So the balls play really different between the start of a session and the end of the session.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Mr SP Bob Jewett is correct. If all you want is a clean sterile germ free surface then fine use soap and water. If you want the smooth shiny surface of a new ball you MUST use an abrasive. There is no other way. This is why body shop products have abrasives for removal of micro scratches in your clear coat.

Polishing Compound (not Rubbing Compound)
Plastic Restorer Products
3M Finessit is a good one.
and of course Aramith products.

I do wish they took out the wax in the cleaner. It probably sells better with it in there.
The difference between the Restorer and Cleaner is the amount and maybe grit size contained. It appears that the grit breaks down quickly acting finer and finer the longer you're cleaning each ball. I use both and I clean after about 1 or 2 hours of play. Why I have 5 sets. Of 3. Another reason to play 3Cushion.

Putting Wax on the balls makes them slide. At least until it gets rubbed off by the chalk impregnated cloth. 45 minutes?? So the balls play really different between the start of a session and the end of the session.

I never said Bob was wrong about needing to use an abrasive to remove surface scratches. It's the idea of bringing the balls back to a factory-new surface that I think is folly.

Using fine abrasives that break down in use into even finer particles (common for most polishing compounds I've used; usually friable aluminum oxide is the abrasive) works well for removing extremely fine scratches, but these won't get out deep scratches (those up to .001" or even deeper). For these scratches you will need to use a courser grit than even a rubbing compound, and by the time you get out all the .001" deep scratches you will have reduced the size of the ball by .002" before you even go to the finer abrasives. Not acceptable in my book. If the balls get that badly beat up, it's time to replace them.

As far as the wax goes, I suspect the manufacturer uses a compound similar to what they sell for cleaning the balls after they have been in use. This compound does contain wax. Apparently, the native resin has a coefficient of friction that is high enough to create a strong throw effect, so the wax is added to reduce the throw. It doesn't hurt sales that it makes the balls beautifully shiny as well.

So, we can live with throw or we can live with wax, but it appears we can't have a bare phenolic resin surface that doesn't induce a lot of throw... or at least that's what Dr. Dave's experiment seems to show.

And I agree with Dr. Dave. It's time to change the rules.

 

[Island Drive]

What is the best method for cleaning pool balls? I built a ball polisher and use it but there is a film that shows up on the balls after a few racks of play. Chalk sticks to the cue ball and transfers to the object ball. Is there a better way to clean them?

If the ball set is old and somewhat worn, the outer surface that was impermeable may not be anymore. When that happens the balls become porous. This will allow table dirt to cling to the ball. If the set is old, replace it, if not I'm sure others here have offered great info. Ya just don't want anything that's abrasive, like the Old Willard ball cleaners with the Wool cleaning pad, it ruins ball sets. Personally, I'd use a clean damp white cotton cloth and wipe em by hand.

 

[dr_dave]

So, we can live with throw or we can live with wax, but it appears we can't have a bare phenolic resin surface that doesn't induce a lot of throw... or at least that's what Dr. Dave's experiment seems to show.

By "doesn't" I assume you meant "does." When the balls are stripped of all residue, the bare "squeaky-clean" phenolic resin surfaces create much more throw than players expect.

Regards,
Dave

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

By "doesn't" I assume you meant "does." When the balls are stripped of all residue, the bare "squeaky-clean" phenolic resin surfaces create much more throw than players expect.

Regards,
Dave

No, I just used a double negative in a grammatically weak way. We can't have (can't expect to achieve) a completely clean surface that doesn't also create unwanted throw.

Hope that's a bit clearer (at least it is for me).

What convinced me was when you lightly sanded the surface of the ball and the throw didn't change much from a solvent-cleaned ball. It's obvious that it's the resin itself that causes the problem, and that the wax (or other surface treatment) just reduces the amount of throw.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

FWIW I did my own little experiment last night. Not with donuts and frozen balls, but with real-life playing conditions.

I (reluctantly) cleaned my measles ball very throughly with denatured alcohol, as well as an object ball. I wiped them dry with a clean cotton rag, then re-wiped with alcohol and dried them again with a microfleece towel.

I thoroughly cleaned my blue circle CB with the Aramith product, then I cleaned another CB with Novus 1. I set up a shot with both a CB and an OB in a straight line directed at the long rail and about a diamond uptable from the center pocket.

I tried to bank the OB into the opposite side pocket, shooting straight at the OB and using spin alone to pocket the ball. I tried every combination I could, using all three CBs, and both uncleaned and solvent-cleaned OBs (I didn't use the Novus on an OB). I had no problem transferring enough spin to make banks in each case. The alcohol-cleaned balls mostly fell in on the long side of the pocket, while the Novus-cleaned CB and alcohol-cleaned OB mostly banked a little short, but still dropped into the short side. I tried my best to use a medium-firm stroke for each shot. And yes, I did miss a few altogether.

I then set up several cut shots from about 15º to 45º to see if I missed any. I used donuts to achieve consistency between trials. I really could not tell the difference between any of the combination of cleaning products used. I deliberately close shots for the experiment, but in each case the OB seemed to cut close to the heart of the pocket, and this was using varying cue delivery speeds as well.

I have no logical explanation for all of this, especially given the results of your carefully carried out experiment, but for me I think that alignment and stroke errors probably cause me to miss way more shots than variations in throw cause. I am truly confused at this point, but for the time being I'm just gonna use the Aramith cleaner once a week on the object balls, and once or twice a day on the CB. At least they'll stay shiny and free of unwanted debris.

 

[fastone371]

Aramith is the one that reinvented the wheel. Lol! Do you think Greenleaf, Mosconi, and Crane used a "special" phenolic billiard ball cleaner?

The facts are that Aramith puts wax in their formulation. They even say they do, so there is no denying it. Why put wax in your emulsion if you don't want wax on the ball? How would you keep wax off the ball once you smear it on? It's just not logical that their cleaner contains wax and yet leaves no wax on the ball, nor does it make sense that they would add it if they don't want it to get on the polished ball.

And, yes, the stuff DOES affect the throw properties of the ball. If you use the Aramith treated ball as the reference, then no, it obviously has no effect. But if you use the untreated phenolic ball as the reference (i.e. cleaned of all traces of residue using a solvent like alcohol, acetone, or by using a detergent) , well, the Aramith product decreases throw compared to the bare resin. Dr. Dave's experiment demonstrated this quite adequately to me.

When my Aramith, Centennial, and Cyclops balls come out of my Diamond polisher using Aramith Ball Cleaner they feel very much like they did when they were brand new. Whether or not the wax stays on the balls does not matter to me if the polished set play similar to the new set. I dont think many people are going to buy a new set of balls and immediately modify the surface of the balls before putting them into use. Many of the bigger local tournaments use freshly polished balls as do most pool halls and even some bars. Out BCA state tournament had brand new Diamonds with brand new Cyclops. If I am cleaning my balls the same way the manufacturer finishes them and the same way many local establishments clean them I feel I am maintaining a certain amount of consistency by using the products I regardless of whether or not it contains any wax.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

When my Aramith, Centennial, and Cyclops balls come out of my Diamond polisher using Aramith Ball Cleaner they feel very much like they did when they were brand new. Whether or not the wax stays on the balls does not matter to me if the polished set play similar to the new set. I dont think many people are going to buy a new set of balls and immediately modify the surface of the balls before putting them into use. Many of the bigger local tournaments use freshly polished balls as do most pool halls and even some bars. Out BCA state tournament had brand new Diamonds with brand new Cyclops. If I am cleaning my balls the same way the manufacturer finishes them and the same way many local establishments clean them I feel I am maintaining a certain amount of consistency by using the products I regardless of whether or not it contains any wax.

If you read my last post you'll see that I've come to the same conclusion that you have. If the manufacturer's products make my Centennials play like when I first opened the box, that's the stuff I think we should use. All I would like is a bit of transparency from the ball manufacturers. Are they adding a final wax polish to the balls before packaging or not?

If a clear answer is not forthcoming, there are other ways to find the truth. A good friend of mine is head of the chemistry department at Skidmore College. His lab can do gas chromatography, mass spectrometry, and NMR analysis of just about anything in any quantity. He told me that back in 80's when coke use was rampant, he used to ask his new students for a $20 bill and almost guarantee them he would find traces of cocaine on it (mostly from street sales and money laundering operations). If he could find that, I'm sure he could find out if there is wax on a new ball.

FWIW I really, really liked the way my balls play when using the Novus products. Nice shine, dust stays off them, good CB action, and chalk wipes right off the CB. Then I found out the stuff contains silanes (silicone). We all know that stuff is illegal to use in play, so I would never recommend it. For use at home, however, I'll probably keep using it on the CB alone, just to keep it staying clean longer. I'll try not to call a foul on myself.

 

[Dan White]

FWIW I really, really liked the way my balls play when using the Novus products. Nice shine, dust stays off them, good CB action, and chalk wipes right off the CB. Then I found out the stuff contains silanes (silicone). We all know that stuff is illegal to use in play, so I would never recommend it. For use at home, however, I'll probably keep using it on the CB alone, just to keep it staying clean longer. I'll try not to call a foul on myself.

Me too. I was surprised and disappointed when I saw how variable throw was with Novus. I knew immediately I couldn't use it anymore. I now consider use of products like this to be pretty much cheating, although most people don't realize it. I play mostly straight pool, and I think a lot of 100+ runs we see wouldn't be 100+ runs if Aramith was used instead of something that causes the balls to open so readily.

 

[3kushn]

FWIW I really, really liked the way my balls play when using the Novus products. Nice shine, dust stays off them, good CB action, and chalk wipes right off the CB. Then I found out the stuff contains silanes (silicone). We all know that stuff is illegal to use in play, so I would never recommend it. For use at home, however, I'll probably keep using it on the CB alone, just to keep it staying clean longer. I'll try not to call a foul on myself.

Doing a very crude search on SILANES didn't exactly equate to Silicone. I'm not sure if you yourself are a chemist, if not ask your friend. I know people very often confuse Silicone Lubricants with Silicone Rubber, Silica, Liquid Silicone and on and on.

Silanes seem to be a large family of compounds used for a variety of purposes.

Lastly if the product contains what we normally think of, silicone spray lubricant, which is mostly a petroleum based emulsion, wouldn't you think this "oily" surface is more likely to pick up and retain chalk dust? Did Dr Dave wipe a ball with silicone lubricant and test throw? I'd guess there's less throw with a lubricated ball. But some of this stuff is not intuitive.

I'm not arguing with you. Just curious. I've been looking and experimenting with this for many years. I've gone so far as to formulate some of my own solutions. I used to work for a Mfg. of very unique cleaning products. My tinkering worked OK but of course had their own issues I felt were addressed with commercial products.

Lastly, if wax is an issue, and I think it is depending on what wax, then there needs to be another step - Removal. I wonder how long the Aramith wax remains on the balls in normal play?

 

[Island Drive]

After reading many threads here about something as simple as cleaning pool balls.....the feeling I'm getting is MANY nowadays are more concerned about something being shiny/pretty/mirror like....and to impress your friends when they come to your home and play pool.
If this is your goal (nothing wrong with that at all) I'd NOT care at all about slightly abrasive cleaners because the "look'' is more important and the skill level will NEVER care or NOTICE the difference.
Nothing wrong with that, it's kinda the way many people think nowadays. My 1960's impression of society nowadays is many wear their personalities on their body or skin or new rims for their vehicle etc. Many nowadays show more of their true self' in this manner than lets say the music of John Denver, which is ALL inner spirit, concern of others with allot love.

I pray for France and the song ''Imagine'' by John Lennon to become a reality....which it never will in my lifetime, and probably yours too.

 

[3kushn]

After reading many threads here about something as simple as cleaning pool balls.....the feeling I'm getting is MANY nowadays are more concerned about something being shiny/pretty/mirror like....and to impress your friends when they come to your home and play pool.
If this is your goal (nothing wrong with that at all) I'd NOT care at all about slightly abrasive cleaners because the "look'' is more important and the skill level will NEVER care or NOTICE the difference.
Nothing wrong with that, it's kinda the way many people think nowadays. My 1960's impression of society nowadays is many wear their personalities on their body or skin or new rims for their vehicle etc. Many nowadays show more of their true self' in this manner than lets say the music of John Denver, which is ALL inner spirit, concern of others with allot love.

I pray for France and the song ''Imagine'' by John Lennon to become a reality....which it never will in my lifetime, and probably yours too.

You may be right about some wanting to impress rather than play the game. I can't speak well about pool although if I thought about it I may come with the conclusion that I like throw better than none and why bother cleaning/resurfacing. When It comes to 3C the numbers speak for the differences in clean vs not. I don't play much in public rooms, I either play by myself in my basement or at a friends basement with his equipment. You could say I don't have friends to impress. Its lonely on the dark side. On those rare times I am in a room and carrying a set, the game is much more enjoyable. At least for the first hour, before they start looking, and playing like house balls.

 

[Sloppy Pockets]

Doing a very crude search on SILANES didn't exactly equate to Silicone. I'm not sure if you yourself are a chemist, if not ask your friend. I know people very often confuse Silicone Lubricants with Silicone Rubber, Silica, Liquid Silicone and on and on.

Silanes seem to be a large family of compounds used for a variety of purposes.

Lastly if the product contains what we normally think of, silicone spray lubricant, which is mostly a petroleum based emulsion, wouldn't you think this "oily" surface is more likely to pick up and retain chalk dust? Did Dr Dave wipe a ball with silicone lubricant and test throw? I'd guess there's less throw with a lubricated ball. But some of this stuff is not intuitive.

I'm not arguing with you. Just curious. I've been looking and experimenting with this for many years. I've gone so far as to formulate some of my own solutions. I used to work for a Mfg. of very unique cleaning products. My tinkering worked OK but of course had their own issues I felt were addressed with commercial products.

Lastly, if wax is an issue, and I think it is depending on what wax, then there needs to be another step - Removal. I wonder how long the Aramith wax remains on the balls in normal play?

Sorry, I meant siloxanes. Silanes are something else. I know they use silanes to treat fiberglass cloth so it will wet out properly when used with epoxy or polyester resins (I've made a few boats)

Specifically, Novus 1 and 2 contain polydimethylsiloxane, which is the active ingredient in every silicone lubricant spray I've looked up, as well as being used in mold release sprays (again, I know this from building boats). Stuff doesn't like sticking to it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polydimethylsiloxane


And, no, I am not a chemist by any stretch of the imagination. I had two full years of chemistry in college (general chem and organic chem), but most of that stuff left my brain a long time ago. My friend Ray, who is a brilliant organic chemist (he pioneered the use of microwaves in chemical synthesis) probably wouldn't want to weigh in on the subject because it's likely outside his field of expertise, and that's the way most good scientists are... unlike us pool players, who all seem to have vast amounts of knowledge on everything under the sun, and have no qualms expounding on it all on public forums.