Go Back   tanTALK - Tanning Salon Business Owners Community > TanTalk Central > Tanning Equipment

Tanning Equipment From Low pressure to High pressure tanning equipment.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-03-2002, 12:20 PM   #1 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2 2002
Location: 2621 W Main Suite 9
Posts: 616
Rep Power: 22 bsmart will become famous soon enough
Well you gotta hand it to these 2 companies. When it comes to providing technical data related to their lamps, they seem to be the most forthcoming. They even provide explanations for what the data means, and how they derive it.

We hear a lot about 'Standardizing the terminology' so everybody can compare one lamp to another. Well, it looks like these guys are setting the standard in this regard. Pull up their data and its easy to compare these guys, one against the other. Seems the other lamp manufacturers would take note and join in.
bsmart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2002, 05:13 PM   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 16 2002
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 41
Rep Power: 0 Philips is on a distinguished road
Thank you for the kind words, we are happy to provide data in any form for the customer to make an informed decision. Not all companies want this kind of comparison so I do not believe that this kind of uniform comparison will be done without FDA regulation of standards.
Philips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2002, 10:24 PM   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 13 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 861
Rep Power: 23 solarmeter has a spectacular aura about solarmeter has a spectacular aura about
Philips,

Have you tried out your "FDA" model 7.0 yet? Any comment?

Some Q's about the info in your brochure book handed out in Vegas:

1. Can you please bring the person pictured in the center (staple page) to Nashville?

2. Why are the UV output values listed all over the map as far as units go? It's confusing seeing watts, milliwatts, microwatts (on FDA radiospectrometric measurement reports), some per cm^2, m^2, or no unit area at all (flux).

3. Can all these "foreign" data points be converted to something we understand better?

A. Total unweighted UV in mW/cm^2, 280-400 nm.
B. Unweighted UVB in mW/cm^2, 280-320 nm.
C. B / A = %UVB (FDA).
D. MED/hr @156 J/m^2 per MED. (Eeff total)

4. How do you define 'persistent pigmentation' in mW? Is it a weighted tanning action spectrum, or just a MMD value? Cosmedico/Wolff uses Emelanog uW/cm^2 250-405 and Edir.pig mW/cm^2 300-440 nm.

Soo - although I agree Philips and Cosmedico publish the best and most comprensive data available, even you two can't seem to agree on what units to report in!

solarmeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2002, 12:28 PM   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2 2002
Location: 2621 W Main Suite 9
Posts: 616
Rep Power: 22 bsmart will become famous soon enough
Gotta hand it to you Solarmeter, there is NO consistancy in the data that is released by the various companies. Sure would be good to have a set standard that everyone (lamp makers) would abide by. It would simplify, and clarify things for the salon owners. A guy or gal can get dizzy looking at all these numbers and trying to decide which lamp best fits their needs.
bsmart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-2002, 02:06 PM   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 13 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 861
Rep Power: 23 solarmeter has a spectacular aura about solarmeter has a spectacular aura about
I hope I didn't scare Mr. Philips away. Would like to see his responses. Maybe his "boss" said to get the heck off-line?
solarmeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2002, 12:18 PM   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2 2002
Location: 2621 W Main Suite 9
Posts: 616
Rep Power: 22 bsmart will become famous soon enough
Come on back Philips. We would like to hear more from you. There's more to gain than lose by being tuned into this website. Folks got questions about lamps, maybe you can help provide enlightening answers. Come back.
bsmart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2002, 02:41 PM   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 16 2002
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 41
Rep Power: 0 Philips is on a distinguished road
Sorry for my absence, have to do some work once and awhile. I am happy to provide data in any format.


"Have you tried out your "FDA" model 7.0 yet? Any comment?

Yes, I am very pleased and have used it alot lately. Thank you


Some Q's about the info in your brochure book handed out in Vegas:

1. Can you please bring the person pictured in the center (staple page) to Nashville?

Unfortunatly she is a professional model. The lady swimmer is under contract with Philips and will be in Nashville.

2. Why are the UV output values listed all over the map as far as units go? It's confusing seeing watts, milliwatts, microwatts (on FDA radiospectrometric measurement reports), some per cm^2, m^2, or no unit area at all (flux).

Sad to say that each manufacturer reports in whatever units they measure in,

3. Can all these "foreign" data points be converted to something we understand better?

We can read the SPD in any format, the ones given are the most popular in Europe and therefore our standard reporting parameters.

A. Total unweighted UV in mW/cm^2, 280-400 nm.

Realize that this is a bare lamp measurement, watts / area measurements rely on external factors beyond the lamp. You can take the total lamp power and divide it by the surface area of the cylinder being measured.

B. Unweighted UVB in mW/cm^2, 280-320 nm.


C. B / A = %UVB (FDA).

We give this in the detailed cut sheets

D. MED/hr @156 J/m^2 per MED. (Eeff total)
I'll have to get back to you on this one. I have Te values but I will have to verify the parameters to make sure they are the same.


4. How do you define 'persistent pigmentation' in mW? Is it a weighted tanning action spectrum, or just a MMD value? Cosmedico/Wolff uses Emelanog uW/cm^2 250-405 and Edir.pig mW/cm^2 300-440 nm.

Again I will have to check.


Soo - although I agree Philips and Cosmedico publish the best and most comprensive data available, even you two can't seem to agree on what units to report in!

Philips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2002, 07:47 PM   #8 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 13 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 861
Rep Power: 23 solarmeter has a spectacular aura about solarmeter has a spectacular aura about
Thanks for your response. Look forward to hearing more re the ones you are checking on.

Quote:
________________________________________ ______________
A. Total unweighted UV in mW/cm^2, 280-400 nm.

Realize that this is a bare lamp measurement, watts / area measurements rely on external factors beyond the lamp. You can take the total lamp power and divide it by the surface area of the cylinder being measured.

________________________________________ _____________

So if the UV output is in watts, or thousandths of watts (milliwatts), I can divide that by lamp surface area in square centimeters to get /cm^2 ?

Good. The F71 BP I'm looking at is 3.75 dia x 27.0 cm long (glass area). Would that be 101.25 cm^2 or something different? Is this true for both non-reflector and reflector versions?

Quote:
________________________________________ ____
3. Can all these "foreign" data points be converted to something we understand better?

We can read the SPD in any format, the ones given are the most popular in Europe and therefore our standard reporting parameters.

________________________________________ ____

That explains it. Wish EU and US would use the same units. Especially Eeff ranges, and UVB ending in 320 vs 315 nm. Seems like the "system" wants to confuse us on purpose! Where is the WMO when we need them?



_________________
Solartech[ This Message was edited by: solarmeter on 2002-09-13 19:53 ]
solarmeter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-2002, 12:35 AM   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 16 2002
Location: Chicago IL
Posts: 41
Rep Power: 0 Philips is on a distinguished road
You are right you can take the output and divide it by the surface and get irradiance. If you use the lamp surface that may give you a good value. Reflectors of course do not send energy out the back so the surface area should be the non reflector area. However no reflector is perfect so it will be a little less than caculated. I sent your persistant pigmentation question to the factory for an answer
Philips is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
PHILIPS UV-ZEN R MAXXS PRIVATE LABEL! 160 W. F71 SOLEILSYS For Sale - FOR SALON OWNERS ONLY 2 06-07-2005 06:10 PM
philips lamps won\'t lite corvette Tanning Equipment 4 07-13-2004 07:16 AM
Can I make a "Do It Yourself" a facial tanner like PHILIPS HB175 samuelycchan Tanning Equipment 3 03-27-2004 11:07 PM
New from Cosmedico JOHN @ URI Tanning Equipment 2 11-19-2002 08:29 AM
COSMEDICO POSTERS JOHN @ URI General Tanning Industry Discussions 1 11-16-2002 09:24 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0
Copyright 2009 - tanTALK.com

click here for advertising info!