|
|
#1 (permalink) |
![]() Join Date: Feb 25 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,621
Rep Power: 10
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Q-1: Which is the best 15 minute MET (Maximum Exposure Time) sunbed:
A. One with a Te (4.0 MED) time of 13.5 minutes (i.e., the lowest "legal" time) and a Tt (tanning time), i.e., the time it takes to delive a dose of tanning photons that will satisfy the most demanding client, of 13.5 minutes.? Or: B. One with a Te (4.0 MED) time of 24 minutes and a Tt time of 5.5 minutes? Q-2: Why does the Model 7.0 (MED/hour) meter "calibrated" at 200 J/m^2/MED give "erroneous" readings? C. Why does a HID/hp system (and sunlight) have more "tanning power" than even the best new-era LP sunlamp? Note: Although it was addressed to Matt, feel free to "chime in" here (if you dare). |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 (permalink) | |
|
FREE ENGFANTUCATION
![]() ![]() Join Date: May 20 2003
Posts: 9,639
Rep Power: 13
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: Some Questions For Matt
Quote:
Q.1: B. Not interested in burning, interested in tanning in the shortest possible time. Q.2: It's reading a time to burn and not a true TAN TIME reading. Q.C: Cause a 5.0meter reading of 100 at 2%UVB is WAY more than a 5.0 reading of 50 at 2%UVB even though they are both "2%". I'd rather have 2% of a million $$$ than 2% of $2. But that's just me.
__________________
"And shut your mouth pussycat e fammi un macchiato, pronto!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhHhXukovMU
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 (permalink) |
![]() Join Date: Feb 25 2000
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 1,621
Rep Power: 10
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: Some Questions For Matt
Some are calibrated at 210 J/m^2, i.e., the 1.0 MED definition used by NEW/EPA in the development of the Ultraviolet Index 9UVI); others use 200 J/m^2, i.e., the definition used by the CIE EAS; and still others use 156 J/m^2 which (as you know) is the definition used by the FDA EAS.
However, you must also keep in mind the fact that Solartech uses the CIE EAS which "weights" the wavelengths between 250 nm and 298 nm at 1.0 while the FDA EAS weights the wavelengths between 250 nm and 302 nm. Thus, photons falling between 299 nm and 302 nm are "devalued" by the MED/lhour meter and this causes innacurate readings for (a) HID/hp and (b) new era sunlamps. That's why I have "specifically calibrated" my MED/hour meters for the "source" (i.e., sunlight, traditional LP, new era LP and HID/hp) I am reading so that they better "match" the reading I get with a spectroradiometer. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Questions & Answers on vitamin D | Sherin | Think Positive About UV | 0 | 01-01-2006 05:57 PM |
| Three Wishes tan lotion - questions and answers | tangenie | Lotion Buzz | 2 | 11-11-2005 02:04 PM |
| My email to Bob Wagner with questions regarding the PTAF | mouthybrat | Open Forum | 60 | 01-09-2004 04:58 AM |