Sportarredo HPO Stand Up

[SUN MASTERS]

If you requested this information previously, I must apologize for entering into the "early senility" period of my life-LOL.

Here is the information you requested for the HPO:

UVB% [280 nm - 320 nm] (1530w) = 1.6% / (620w) = 2.6% (see comments below)

UVA2% [320 nm - 340 nm] (1530w) = 5.6% / (620w) = 6.0%

UVA1% [340 nm - 400 nm] (1530w) = 92.8% / (620w) = 91.4%

UVA% [320 nm - 400 nm] (1530w) = 98.4% / (620w) = 97.4%

Keep in mind that UVB percentage can be misleading because the % is a function of the amount of UVA irradiance available and that (as you would expect) the 1530w lamp has more TI (Total Irradiance) than the 620w lamp. For instance, the "absolute" amount of UVB irradiance in the 1530w lamp is 6164 mW/m^2 and the 620w is 5214 mW/m^2. Thus, the difference in the "absolute" amount of UVB between the two is much less (i.e., the 1530w has only 18% more than the 620w) than is the percentage difference (where there is a 63% difference).

What is important is that both lamps have more than enough UVB energy to stimulate the production of vitamin D within the session time of the HPO.



Let me know if you need more information.

Regards.

Don

[SUN MASTERS]

As requested by Jim these are the readings on the Sportarredo HPO by Don Smith.

[Jim Fisher]

Nice numbers

[solarmeter®]

Are they? Skim reading again?

Did you move the UVB decimal point five places left to see what the mW/cm² would be?
.

[solarmeter®]

Horrors.... I goofed. Move the decimal point four places left to convert mW/m² to mW/cm² as a 6.0 meter would read (not five places).

So 6164 mW/m² = 0.62 mW/cm², and
So 5214 mW/m² = 0.52 mW/cm².

I was thinking about 1 m² = 10000 cm² and counted 5 decimal points in error.

6164/10000 = 0.62 not 0.062. Sorry.

Point was..... for those of you who have 6.0 meters.... you can see readings from many and varied lamps ranging from a low of ~0.20 up to a whopping 2.00 mW/cm² ... so take the 0.62 (or 0.52) from the Sportarredo HPO in that context.

Having said that... I do not know where on the UVB spectrum the photons are placed, so (as many of you know) if they are left-shifted from "normal" HP then they may provide results equal or better to right-shifted photons reading higher on a 6.0 meter. That's where a 7.0 meter can distinguish the difference.

Thanks to an email from Don pointing out my (rare) math error!

[HBT6872]

Stop the presses, what is today's date?

[solarmeter®]

You're funny.... ^_^

[Jim Fisher]

Huh

Horrors.... I goofed. Move the decimal point four places left to convert mW/m² to mW/cm² as a 6.0 meter would read (not five places).

So 6164 mW/m² = 0.62 mW/cm², and
So 5214 mW/m² = 0.52 mW/cm².

I was thinking about 1 m² = 10000 cm² and counted 5 decimal points in error.

6164/10000 = 0.62 not 0.062. Sorry.

Point was..... for those of you who have 6.0 meters.... you can see readings from many and varied lamps ranging from a low of ~0.20 up to a whopping 2.00 mW/cm² ... so take the 0.62 (or 0.52) from the Sportarredo HPO in that context.

Having said that... I do not know where on the UVB spectrum the photons are placed, so (as many of you know) if they are left-shifted from "normal" HP then they may provide results equal or better to right-shifted photons reading higher on a 6.0 meter. That's where a 7.0 meter can distinguish the difference.

Thanks to an email from Don pointing out my (rare) math error!

[solarmeter®]

Huh

It just means to understand the above numbers in the same way a 6.0 meter reads, move the decimal point 4 places from the end of the /m² to get /cm².

If the number was 18000. then 1.80 like this:



Get it?