highest output reading ever!

[Brian Oshman]

What kind of setup do you want?
Do you want Mug 6 w/clear or do you want single mirrored?
What wattage do you want? 400, 500, 1000, 1500, 2000
Do want it to have a parabolic reflector with radial mount lamps or do you want a traditional reflector with axial mount lamps?

Does it have to have a specific output?

Let me know what you want and I'll research it and can build it for you to run on a standard 120 volt outlet.

I know that a complete cassette with single mirrored glass, with reflector, lamp and lampholder and frame is about $500 bucks new. (not counting controls and ballast, ignitor, cooling, case, etc...) Maybe can put something together for you. Might have some other options too.

[solarmeter®]

I would want it to put out close to 199 mW/cm² at ~3" distance..... whatever wattage that would be. Prefer the most "modern" version that still gives stable irradiance when warmed up to equalibrium. If that means mirrored glass, parabolic reflector, radial mount then fine.

However if that setup is extremely sensitive for metering (illumination geometry too focused), then I'd prefer the more traditional setup.

Would like to keep the cost as close to $500 as feasible.

[Brian Oshman]

You would need single mirrored glass, parabolic with radial lamp, 1000 watts.

I will let you know what something like that will cost. Give me a couple days.

[Beat]

Originally Posted by Beat

The bed is sold since a couple of years here in Italy they are just in a middle of restyling it actually is

The new one will be ready very soon, based on their drawings, it will be prettier.

I'm trying to forcing them to makes a 360° but they doesn't trust in this kind of bed only because italian market doesn't likes it.

I will, if they will doing. The low amp required helps alot if I will choose to add to my salon, this bed needs 11 Kw to runs and in the 360 version (when they'll going to do it) will need only 18 Kw as one of the big VHR with AC.

Vito

[Drew]

Beat, White Sun Sold the Chronos made by Euroelectrica in Italy for 2 years before it came to the US. It is a 360.

Also, Logicam makes a 360 for italian market. He has them in all of his stores.

[Beat]

White Sun has 3 units in Italy when start to sell it to U.S.

Logicam, when starts selling 360 sunbed, NOPE!

You teach that sometimes be the first, be the brave, reward you!

But overall, when I speak about force him to make a 360 with this amazing output is for Italian market.

I'd like to have a 18 kw units that deliver 500 A+B on glass and 200 A+B on body, at affordable price.

[Miraclesun]

Beat,
Nice readings. The only problem I see with the unit in the picture is that the outside two columns are angled to much towards the center. This may be ok for the Italian market, but us US people are corn fed, and this would miss our arms and sides. Tell Mr. V that Al said hi.

Al

[Natureboy]

Bench racing.

[Le]

Originally Posted by Natureboy

Bench racing.

Yea, I get enough of that on other forums.

"...after adding the wing, I will shave .5 seconds of my ET..."

[Don]

Some "donsense" is needed in order to "interpret" these readings.

[Note: W/cm^2 = the "reporting units" used in spectroradiometry.]

1. 416.0 mW/cm^2 = 0.416 W/cm^2 (i.e., the "highest reading" ever)
2. 186.8 mW/cm^2 = 0.1868 W/cm^2

Compare these reading to these:

1. Typical summer day. 7.3 mW/cm^2 / 0.0073962 W/cm^2
2. Highest terrestrial......7.3 mW/cm^2 / 0.0073962 W/cm^2
3. Extraterrestrial (42K)11.4 mW/cm^2 / 0.114442 W/cm^2

IF these readings are correct then:

1. The 186.8 mW/cm^2 reading is 16.4 times higher than the extraterrestrial (i.e., at 42,000 ft altitude) reading (11.4 mW/cm^2).

2. The 416.0 mW/cm^2 (i.e., the "highest ever" reading) is 36.5 times higher than the extraterrestrial (i.e., at 42,000 ft altitude) reading (11.4 mW/cm^2).

3. The 186.8 mW/cm^2 reading is 25.6 times higher than the 7.3 mW/cm^2 "highest terrestrial" reading.

4. The 416.0 mW/cm^2 reading is 57.0 times higher than the 7.3 mW/cm^2 "highest terrestrial" reading.

5. The 416.0 mW/cm^2 (i.e., the "highest ever" reading) is 84.9 times higher than the "typical summer day (i.e., in both Iowa and the UK on the same day)) reading (4.9 mW/cm^2).

6. The 186.8 mW/cm^2 reading is 38.1 times higher than the "typical summer day (i.e., in both Iowa and the UK on the same day) reading (4.9 mW/cm^2).

Methinks there is a "decimal point" and/or "calibration" error here. Unless, of course, you all REALLY believe that a HID/hp sunbed emits more UVB/UVA than the sun does at the edge of our atmosphere (i.e., at 42,000 ft). IF you believe that, I have some "ocean front" lots here in AZ for sale.

[Miraclesun]

For you salon owners that didn't understand that. I'll put it in layman's terms, it's like standing on the equator. You may want to bring a cold glass of ice water with you.

Al

[Don]

Al:

If the numbers are right, it's like being "at the equator" at an altitude of 42,000 feet.

You'll need more than a "cold glass of ice water" to cool down!

The "bottom line" is that there is something wrong with the numbers.

[Ziti]

Damnnnn I just got my HPs up and running tonight.. Do I need extra special meters?

All's I know right now is that my tan kicked in mega brown and I haven't tanned in over a month!

Sorry, I didn't intend to hijack the thread, I really think Marty should send me some bsne meters

[bsne]

Still have some meters for sale including a HP meter...see classifieds

[sparky]

The most important meter for you is the 7.0 MED meter.

This will allow calculation of session times to prevent over-exposure.

The Black Sun and Vertical in specific can be agressive with new (non-solarized) glass and original Euro lamps.

It's not an overly strong lamp so an HP version of the 5.0 is not necessary, as you'll never see readings over 199.9 Mw

5.0 is used most often to measure lamp degradation for replacement of lamps.

6.0 is more of a utility after you have the others in stock already.

Don't forget about the 6.4 Vit D meter, to prove out the news stories

[Beat]

Don,

the 416 was taken on my own salon equipment, a TK 8000.

The higher A+B one was that:



That meter reads the same as solarmeter's one but at higher costs..



I don't understand about hot and cool, I believe was infrared rays. Sorry I don't have it but I metered the mattress Celsius and was "normal".

I should have the pic about it in some place, I will post it.

Med meter says:



186.8 is slightly better than 171 taken in Magic unit



IMHO is that is good to have that mw output using less than half electricity used in other units. The ballast is 500 watt (4.5 amp) with a 500 watt lamp.

I'm a skintype 3 and I've tanned in into using a bunny sticker leave an IPD typical of HP unit and a great tanning result.

Sorry for share Italian unit informations, I don't know you haven't this unit, but I can't give you informations about US units because in Italy we don't have units like yours. Also MATRIX isn't the same unit as your, because electricity is different, usually units meter less here, because we have 380 v and 50 HZ.

[solarmeter®]

Don,

The common urban rumor that a sunbed puts out ~4 times what the "summer" sun does applys to the erythemal rays (MED/hr) not the UVA rays. Pointing a 7.0 meter at the solar noon June sun and a wide range of tanning beds will (as you know) pretty much bear this out within a range of 3-5 times "stronger" than sun.

BUT: the UVA photons from beds are INDEED many many times more than the sun!

You will get about 5.0 mW/cm² on a typical summer noon (or 4.9 as you say) on a regular model 5.0 meter.

Average 100W bed reads 20 (4 x sun)
Average 160W bed reads 40 (8 x sun)
Average VHO new era reads 60 (12 x sun)
Average 400W facial reads 80 (16 x sun)
Average UB818 HP reads 120 (24 x sun)

So a 636 reading 180 (36 x sun) is not unrealistic. Nor is over 200 as the meter moves closer to glass..... as the 5.0HP meter will show.

But even I have to wonder about numbers like 400 or 500. Beat - you need to buy a piece of Schott WG400 filterglass and hold it over that that German meter. The reading should fall to almost zero. If it doesn't then the sensor is picking up some visible and IR and adding those to the readings.... which could explain the (really) big numbers.

What kind of numbers are you seeing on the 5.0HP meters at what locations to the glass? Are they really as high as the German meter? If so... then maybe it is the TRUTH - and we need to send Don over there with his Optronics 754 and entrance aperture sized/calibrated to prevent overfill or flooding of extreme photons!

[Don]

Here are some spectroradiometer readings that will substantiate my premise that the handheld radiometer readings are WAY too high. I believe that two factors account for the high readings. (1) the meters read photons >400 nm (especially Beat's meter) and (2) the meters are calibrated against low pressure lamps which "skews" the data.

(mW/cm^2 - 280 nm - 400 nm)

1. Matrix (1000w) = 74.9
2. Magic (1000w) = 68.2
3. Matrix (620w) = 39.7
4. Saturn (???) = 38.1
5. Black Sun - Mattress (500w) = 36.4
6. Black Sun - 360 (500w) = 34.1
7. Black Sun - Booth (500w) = 31.7

8. Highest terrestrial reading = 7.4
9. Extraterrestrial (42,000 ft) reading = 11.0

Sparky is "half right" (I DID NOT say or imply that he is half-assed-LOL) when he says that the Model 7.0 (MED/hour) meter provides information that is more relevant than the Model 5.0. What I have found is that the "ratio" between the Tt (tanning) time and the Te (4.0 MED) time provides the information that a salon owner need to make an informed decision. The best systems are those that have a lower Tt time than a Te time. [Note: Having a longer Tt time than the Te time is like owing more on your car than you can sell it for. In both cases you are "upside down" and that isn't good.]

Example 1: Tt = 20 minutes / Te = 20 minutes. Tt/Te Ratio = 1.0

Example 2: Tt = 30 minutes / Te = 20 minutes. Tt/Te Ratio = 0.67 [Note: This example will only deliver 67% of the dose of tanning photons in the 20 minute session time (i.e., it is "upside down").]

Example 3: Tt = 10 minutes / Tt = 20 minutes. Tt/Te Ratio = 2.0 [Note: This example will deliver 200% of the tanning photons in the 20 minute session time than example 1 and 3 times (300%) more than Example 2.]

How do you estimate the Tt if you don't have a $50,000 spectroradiometer. Easy. Just subtract the UVB (Model 6.0) reading from the UVA/UVB (Model 5.0) reading and you will have "mostly" UVA1 (340 nm - 400 nm) which, as you know, are the wavelengths that induce tanning. Although you won't be able to calculate the Tt time (or dose) you will have a higher UVA1 reading in example 3 than in example 1 and (especially) example 2.

In the case of both the Matrix and the Magic, the Tt times are significantly lower than the Te time which means a favorable Tt/Te Ratio (which explains why they are so popular with clients). The Black Sun units, on the other hand, had longer Tt times than Te times which means that they were "upside down" regarding their Tt/Te Ratio.

So how do the "new era" LP lamps compare to the Matrix and the Magic? The new era lamps (9K90, PWR Series, Sol Glass, etc.) have significantly narrowed the gap but still have a way to go to equal the "tanning power" of a 1000w HID/hp system (they are about equal to a 600-700w HID/hp system).

[solarmeter®]

Don,

Back in 2002 at the "Nashville Shoot Out" we were basically in agreement about the following 5.0 readings vs whatever you were using back then:

Venus: 73.2
Saturn: 69.5
Chronos: 85.0
UB924: 65.7
Matrix V28: 69.7
Matrix L33: 74.1

Nothing we measured at body position (or even on bottom acrylic pointing up) was over 100. Now 3-4 years later we are seeing Brian's pic of 171, and many others between 150-200 not counting the crazy 400-500 Beat posts.

The handhelds have NOT changed... they still read the same to sun at any given zenith angle and sky condition - year after year after year.

So SOMETHING has changed: the beds got stronger or the Optronics can't read that high or both! Not saying the 5.0's are perfect - but they are NOT reading DOUBLE reality... like 150 when reality is 75 !!!

The modern parabolic reflectors and "vertical" lamps surely have increased output, along with mirror glass, etc.

[Don]

Well, first of all, you were using your "Gold Standard" meters and we were trying our best to control all of the important measurement variables.

The pictures show that there is no standardization in (1) the placement of the meter, (2) the distance from the light source, (3) the time (during the session) when the measurement is taken. The end result is - GI-GO (Garbage In - Garbage Out).

So (once again);

1. Run the sunbed through a session and then let it cool down for 10 minutes.

2. Start making your readings at 3 minutes into the next session. [Take minute-by-minute readings so that you can "see for yourself" how the performance "degrades" over the session. If too much degradation takes place (especially in HID/hp systems), you need to take a look at your air flow and cooling.

3. Take readings at 25 cm above the bench acrylic or mattress. [Calculate and record the distance from the top of the meter to the surface of the canopy acrylic.]

4. Place your meter in the location where you get the highest reading. [During the "warm up" session (see # 1 above), you can "experiment" and find this point.]

Now - IF everyone followed this STP (Standard Testing Protocol) and reported, (for instance) the distance between the top of the meter and the canopy, we wouldn't have so much variation and it would make it much easier to "interpret" the readings.

And IF a certain meter company in Michigan (no name will be given to protect the guilty) would "separate" the meter from the probe (so that they could make the readings without being a contortionist), it would make it MUCH easier to make readings. Message from the "Real World" to Michigan: The canopy of the new sunbeds comes down too far to get your arm in to make a reading and even if you can get your arm in, you can't see the meter.