|
Tanning Equipment From Low pressure to High pressure tanning equipment. |
| LinkBack | Thread Tools |
10-16-2002, 01:09 PM | #1 (permalink) |
I love Derf!! Join Date: Apr 5 2001 Age: 66
Posts: 7,766
Rep Power: 27 | Solarmeter Steve said: [quote}First of all, your acrylic is reducing MED readings on both beds by 11% !! Someday try a brand new piece and see if it's much better or not. Remember - most UVA zips right thru solarized acrylic. It is the UVB and MED/hr that suffers.[/quote} I installed brand new acrylics on the two beds for the lamp comparison. I puchased through Loop Acrylics. The protective film on the acrylics had SolarCast on it. What is your take on this? |
10-16-2002, 01:58 PM | #2 (permalink) |
Join Date: Nov 13 2001 Location: MI
Posts: 861
Rep Power: 23 | Ha-ha.. now YOU're trying to "start something", eh? It is a very good question though. Your new acrylic would not be solarized yet (I hope). It is POSSIBLE that blocking ~10% of erythemal UVB rays (280-302 nm) is NORMAL for new UVT acrylic: I'm not quite sure. Those "MED" rays are more prone to "absorbtion" than are the higher wavelength UVBs up thru 320 nm, and of course UVA. I use Glassflex (Polycast) UVT as window lens for model 5.0 UVA/B meter. It is thin (.040"), and transmits about 95% of "total UV". The other meters have Schott UV glass windows - not UVT acrylic. So just out of curiosity I tried putting brand new piece of my UVT in front of a model 7.0 MED/hr meter: It "blocked" 11%. So therefore what you are seeing is probably normal for that wavelength range. Also, I have read that about 5% of any wavelength is "reflected" away from the "surfaces" of any glass or acrylic... so even a 5% drop in UVA might be normal as well. Once solarization starts many hours later, the transmission loss in the low wavelength ranges would become dramatic: 50-100% !!! It would be interesting to "test" every brand/type of acrylic (clear and frosted) with all three kinds of meters, or better yet with Don's Optronics 740. |
10-16-2002, 02:31 PM | #3 (permalink) |
I love Derf!! Join Date: Apr 5 2001 Age: 66
Posts: 7,766
Rep Power: 27 | Thank you, I thought maybe I bought some bad acrylics. Now I see what you are saying. Quote:It would be interesting to "test" every brand/type of acrylic (clear and frosted) with all three kinds of meters, or better yet with Don's Optronics 740. Nope I don't want that job. Someone else can have it. |
10-18-2002, 03:11 PM | #5 (permalink) |
Join Date: Oct 15 2002 Location: Northeast Age: 51
Posts: 370
Rep Power: 22 | No info or testing on different acrylics.All this reasearch on lamps and none on acrylics.Whats the sense of having great lamps and guessing on acrylics.There should be some kind of standard.I would just like to hear from someone w/ experience.Which acrylics are better than others. |
10-19-2002, 09:30 AM | #6 (permalink) |
I love Derf!! Join Date: Apr 5 2001 Age: 66
Posts: 7,766
Rep Power: 27 | You are correct vettes. Seems Loop acrylics are a good company. I have purchased from distributors, and they came from Loop, I have purchased from a glass company, they said the acrylic was uv acrylic but I wonder about that. This last time I went straight to Loop. Would like more information on other suppliers too. |
10-21-2002, 12:30 PM | #7 (permalink) |
Join Date: May 2 2002 Location: 2621 W Main Suite 9
Posts: 616
Rep Power: 22 | Loop Acrylics is the place for me!! I've bought from them for years now and always been satisified with their service. I just replaced a couple of acrylic panels last week. Got them from Loop. I also tried the acrylic on, acrylic off test after seeing the test mentioned here last week. Using the 5.0 meter I didn't see any decrease in total UV measured by the meter with the acrylics on vs. off. In fact (and I can't explain this) the UV readings actually went UP slightly with the acrylics on!! I took as consistant measurements as I could, and checked twice to make sure of what I was seeing. It confirmed my readings, went UP with the acrylic ON. |
10-21-2002, 07:48 PM | #8 (permalink) |
Join Date: Nov 13 2001 Location: MI
Posts: 861
Rep Power: 23 | That's probably because the acrylic may be inmproving cosine (angular) response of light entering the meter's detector window. In other words, bulbs adjacent to the ones you were "looking at" without acrylic are "spreading" (diffusing) their irradiance throughout the acrylic. That's not important however, because Model 5.0 is absolutely WORTHLESS for checking acrylic transmission! The UVA passes thru easily. It's the UVB and MED rays that get "eaten" by UVT acrylic. |
10-23-2002, 12:34 PM | #9 (permalink) |
Join Date: May 2 2002 Location: 2621 W Main Suite 9
Posts: 616
Rep Power: 22 | What is Mitzi taking all her readings with?? Is she not reading TOTAL UV output in this lamp comparison she's doing with Philips and Black Sun? What is the purpose of having a 5.0 meter?? |
10-23-2002, 02:29 PM | #10 (permalink) |
Join Date: Nov 13 2001 Location: MI
Posts: 861
Rep Power: 23 | She's using the total UV meter to see what UVA differences are. She's also using the MED/hr meter for erythemal output / Te comparisons. THAT's the one showing loss through acrylic. The meters all have different purposes. Please read this thread for more detail: http://www.tantalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?topic=2323633&forum=37&4 You "could" use the Model 7.0 for lamp aging instead of Model 5.0, but the resolution range is lower... and you can't see HP browning rays. |
Bookmarks |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Acrylics breaking like crazy | Ginger | Tanning Equipment | 28 | 01-26-2012 11:15 AM |
StandUp Tanning- Acrylics or Not? | JOHN @ URI | Tanning Equipment | 8 | 08-14-2003 12:29 PM |
BRAND NEW ACRYLICS - STILL IN BOXES | patty38 | For Sale - FOR SALON OWNERS ONLY | 3 | 01-18-2003 11:04 PM |
What I learned working and training at Steve Miller's salons! | Soakinuptherays | General Tanning Industry Discussions | 6 | 01-31-2002 07:58 PM |