Chapters
1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9
2007-08 Lamp Application Guide
Tanning Lamps
Tanning Lamp Trends
Tanning Lamps And Ultraviolet Light
The Skin And Ultraviolet Light
Types Of Tanning Lamps
Low-Pressure Lamps
RUVA Lamps
VHO Lamps
High-Pressure Lamps
Tanning Lamp Maintenance
Tanning Lamp Construction
The Effects Of External Factors On Tanning Lamps
Tanning Lamp Choices
Tanning Lamp Care
Accuracy Of Measurements
Compatibility
Possible Amendments
Revisions Under Consideration
Chapter Four
Tanning lamps are traditionally the second-largest investment a salon owner makes behind tanning equipment. Therefore, understanding their significance and maintenance requirements is essential to running a quality tanning salon. Only by understanding how lamps function and how they are constructed will you offer the best level of service to your customers.
This chapter contains the latest lamp trends for the season. Included is the most current lamp information that provides you with everything you need to learn how tanning lamps are made, including the differences between the many types of tanning lamps on the market; how to care for them; and, when and how to replace them in order to be compliant with the FDA.
This section also provides you with a clear understanding of energy output and the ratio of UVA to UVB, which is often a misunderstood concept in the indoor tanning industry.
Tanning lamps are one of the most important pieces to the indoor tanning puzzle. Salon owners and their employees need to fully understand their function, construction and maintenance requirements so they can offer the best possible service to their customers.
Tanning lamps are traditionally the second-largest investment a salon owner makes behind tanning equipment. Many factors influence the production and life of a tanning lamp and that is why salon owners are taking a hard look at the wide selection of professional tanning lamps on the market.
Lamp makers continue to develop lamps with characteristics that cater to the new and advanced tanner while meeting the needs of the salon owner. The consumer continues to demand UV exposure that reduces tanning time while offering the ultraviolet combination that best suits his or her tanning needs.
Manufacturers continue to produce a variety of tanning lamps, with varying UVA and UVB combinations. The specific composition of the output mainly is governed by the qualities of the specific phosphors used. Other important factors in the combination and intensity of UV output are electrodes, the gas filling and the trace amount of mercury found in sealed lamps.
Over the past few years, lamp suppliers have offered some new innovations including dual-phosphor lamps, twisted glass tubes, technology that virtually eliminates end blackening and lamps that produce never-before-achieved levels of performance.
Staying on course with last year, lamp makers continue on their technological quest for the 2007 season. Of particular importance are the issues of minimizing end blackening, balancing the distribution of heat in the lamp and extending the service life of the lamp. Many suppliers also are diversifying their offerings to include more vertical applications for stand-up units.
Other trends in lamps include increasing the number of tanning photons while reducing the number of photo-aging photons to achieve the deepest, darkest tan possible from a low-pressure lamp. Manufacturers also are engineering newer lamps that offer the benefits of high-pressure tanning in a low-pressure lamp.
Once a salon operator chooses a lamp they must choose a product that is FDA-compliant and has an adequate lamp life. In fact, some of the most-asked questions salon owners have regarding tanning lamps are about output, expected lamp life, whether the lamp has new technology or standard performance, and whether the distributor provides compatibility sheets with the lamps ordered. All of these issues are important and vital when choosing which lamp to order.
Measurement of lamp output has become part of a salon’s daily routine. For reasons of expediency and cost, the measuring instrument preferred by most salon owners is generally the pocket-sized type.
Salon owners understand that output readings play an important role in tracking lamp life. They are finding that rated lifetime listings on some lamps are less than real-world situations. There are many external factors that influence the output and life of tanning lamps including distance, external reflectors, filters, acrylics, and electrical and thermal conditions.
Replacement lamps must be as effective as the original lamps—plus or minus 10 percent—in causing erythema and melanogenesis. Federal, state and local authorities report that this is a frequent breach found during a tanning salon inspection.
A revision to the FDA regulations on tanning equipment takes much of the guesswork out of choosing compatible replacement lamps. Since the procedures and testing necessary to satisfy the regulations are beyond the capabilities of many salon owners, primary determination of whether a replacement is compatible is the responsibility of the lamp manufacturer.
Once lamp compatibility is established, FDA regulations require the manufacturer to print the specific models that the new lamp is designed to replace somewhere on the lamp or accompanying packaging. If a lamp manufacturer or distributor fails to make a lamp compatibility report available, it would be prudent for salon owners not to use the lamp in question.
This standard must be followed even in areas without specific state regulations.
Manufacturers give recommendations on the useful life of their lamps; however, these recommendations only can be used as a guide because there is no clear and official definition of the term useful life. Each manufacturer can make its own definition.
It’s important to note that different operating conditions, as well as equipment-related factors, have in certain cases a considerable effect on the actual useful life of a tanning lamp.
First and foremost is the fact that tanning lamps do not emit artificial ultraviolet light, as artificial light rays do not exist. What differentiates the rays produced by an indoor tanning lamp from those produced by the sun is the spectral distribution and intensity of the rays.
In general, most modern tanning lamps produce light in the UVA range (320 nm to 400 nm) at a higher level than is received on the earth’s surface from the sun and UVB radiation (280 nm to 320 nm) at a lower level. The goal is to generate more effective tanning and less incidence of erythema or sunburn. However, the ultraviolet rays themselves are indistinguishable from sunlight, except in intensity and distribution.
The physiological effects of ultraviolet exposure, such as tanning and the many health benefits, are almost exclusively dependent on the UV portion of sunlight. This is why it is important that suntanning devices generate ultraviolet rays. There are various ultraviolet light sources.
Mercury Vapor Lamps
Mercury-vapor lamps, as used in high-pressure tanning units and some table-top facial models, have a line spectrum with a relatively large amount of UVA and little UVB.
Metal Halide Lamps
Metal halide lamps, in which much of the extreme radiation is absorbed by metal additives and subsequently fluoresces at more desirable wavelengths, produce a more continuous light spectrum with adequate UVA emission.
Low-Pressure Fluorescent Lamps
The low-pressure fluorescent lamp is similar to the metal halide lamp in terms of its continuous energy distribution. However, it is different in the sense that it operates on a low-pressure discharge of the mercury vapor. The dominant emission inside this lamp is at 254 nm. However, the phosphorescent material applied to the inside of the lamp tube absorbs these UVC rays and converts them into rays of longer wavelengths.
There are many different types of phosphors available and through a skillful combination of manufacturing methods, light in virtually every spectrum can be created—from UVB up to the visible light sector. The low-pressure discharge also allows the use of hard-glass tubes that contain minerals that act as a filter for the shorter rays. Additional advantages of the fluorescent lamp are in its moderate operating and production costs, low operating temperature, long life and immediate readiness for use.
The fluorescent lamp’s disadvantages include limited radiation output per lamp, resulting in the need for a greater number of lamps to achieve adequate tanning. However, by use of an exterior reflector system behind the lamps, less radiation is lost. Rather, it is captured and reflected back toward the body; consequently, fewer lamps per side are needed. A relatively short distance between the lamp and the body also is required for this type of lamp.
Reflector Lamps Reflector lamps are a sub-group of the low-pressure technology that do not require a special, external reflector system. Reflector, or RUVA, lamps come with an internal reflective layer on the inside of the tube, forcing all output to radiate through the front side of the lamp.
Tanning and burning are two different reactions to exposure to ultraviolet radiation. The first is a protective mechanism in response to the presence of ultraviolet light. The second is the very damage that the first evolved to prevent.
Tanning is simply the proliferation within the skin of a brownish pigment known as melanin, which is produced by a special type of skin cells called melanocytes. Melanin is secreted by these cells following ultraviolet light stimulation. The relative amount of melanin produced in response to this stimulation is determined genetically.
When secreted, melanin is first pinkish in color. As it makes its way toward the surface of the skin, the pigment is oxidized by incoming ultraviolet rays and turns brown. Once it is oxidized, melanin has the ability to absorb harmful ultraviolet radiation, thereby acting as the skin’s builtin protection against the ultraviolet rays.
Tanning can be immediate, delayed or both. Immediate tanning results from the oxidation of existing melanin within the skin. Delayed tanning or pigmentation occurs when the melanocytes are stimulated to produce additional pigment. Sunburn, or erythema, takes place when the ultraviolet exposure exceeds the protection afforded by the existing melanin in the skin. The capillaries in the skin swell, resulting in reddening of the skin, accompanied by increased sensitivity and itching.
All wavelengths of light are not equally effective in stimulating pigment production and causing sunburn. The visible spectrum is relatively ineffective in both of these areas. As the wavelength grows progressively shorter; however, these effects become more pronounced. Specifically, ultraviolet light in the UVB range can be from 10 to 1,000 times more effective than in the UVA range in stimulating both melanin production and erythema. While the heightened melanin production from high levels of UVB sounds ideal, caution is recommended. Unless exposure is controlled carefully, the effect will be accompanied in most people by moderate to severe sunburn and peeling of the outer skin layers, which robs the body of the melanin that was produced.
On the other hand, UVA causes only mild erythema, which is not even considered sunburn by most. Extremely high levels of UVA are required before the damage causes discomfort. This is why tanning lamps are manufactured to emit mainly UVA rays and only a minimal amount of UVB. However, chronic overexposure to UVA radiation has been linked to a breakdown of the elastic fibers in the skin, resulting in wrinkling and the development of a leathery texture.
The absolute UV output of a tanning lamp is dependent on a number of factors, including the unit in which it is installed, specifically the condition of the starters, ballasts and acrylic. The only way to come up with raw UVA/UVB output levels to compare different lamps would be to measure their outputs when installed in the same fixture. So far, no objective comparisons of this variety have been made public.
Without knowing the actual intensity of the ultraviolet produced by a lamp, the UVB percentage is, at best, an incomplete indicator of its tanning abilities. It is quite possible for a lamp emitting a higher amount of UVB than another to have a lower UVB percentage, simply by also emitting a proportionally larger amount of UVA. Both pigmentation and erythema are markedly more pronounced in the UVB range (280 nm to 320 nm) than in the UVA range (320 nm to 400 nm).
Low-Pressure Lamps
The low-pressure lamp, or fluorescent lamp, is a gas-discharge lamp that operates on a principle very different from that of the high-pressure mercury lamp. Its gas pressure is much lower and is not contained in a clear layer—the phosphors—on the inside.
As in other gas-discharge lamps, a discharge takes place when a stream of electrons strikes the molecules of mercury vapor. These become excited or acquire an excess of energy that is subsequently emitted as ultraviolet radiation with a wavelength of 254 nm. This UVC radiation then encounters the phosphor layer on the inside of the glass tube that converts it to radiation of longer wavelengths.
The specific composition of the output is governed by the qualities of the specific phosphors used. There is, as a result, a wide range of possible lamp output. One of these is the UV fluorescent lamp, designed to emit optimum amounts of ultraviolet radiation of the ideal wavelengths.
Tanning lamps generate UV light in a similar way as light is produced by standard fluorescent lamps commonly used in general lighting. The major difference between these two lamp types lies in the phosphors used. The fundamental mechanism to produce light radiation is called the photo-luminescence process. The main components responsible for producing UV radiation in a sunlamp are the electrodes, the gas filling, the phosphor and the trace amount of mercury, which all are sealed inside the lamp.
There are two basic steps from the point of plugging in the lamp to the emission of radiation. First, the electrical energy received by the lamp is transformed into short-wave radiation (UVC) during the discharge process. Second, the phosphors inside the lamp come into play and transform the short-wave radiation into a continuous spectrum of longer wavelength (UVB, UVA, etc., depending on the phosphor).
When the voltage is applied via the electrodes, particles called electrons are charged and move in a stream from one electrode to the other through the gas-filled tube.
On their way through the tube, these “loaded” particles (the electrons) hit the mercury atoms of the gas inside the lamp and create a higher energy level. The electrons peak at this higher energy level only for a very short time and then fall back to their original level. During their relapse, the electrons release the stored energy in the form of radiation at a certain wavelength. In the case of mercury vapor, low-pressure discharge is produced at a wavelength of 254 nm.
This UVC radiation hits the phosphor layer on the inside of the glass tube that changes the character of the radiation. The energy is physically transformed from the shorter wavelength into rays of longer wavelengths, including UVB, UVA, visible light and infrared rays, depending on the phosphors used. Although UVC is produced inside the tube, no UVC actually is emitted through the tube.
Finally, the transformed radiation passes through the glass of the lamp that can act as a filter and cause additional modification of the emission spectrum.
Prerequisites For Producing An Emission Spectrum
The available number of loaded particles (the electrons) are of extreme importance. It is the electrons that interact with the mercury atoms and which are responsible for continuously producing the primary radiation to excite the phosphor layer.
This electrical discharge must be stabilized immediately after ignition of the lamp. An inductive working ballast generally is used to produce such stabilized conditions for the lamp’s operation.
The phosphor used in the lamp has perhaps the most significant effect on lamp output. It absorbs the short-wave energy and then transforms it into longer wave radiation. The phosphor’s efficiency at converting the radiation contributed to the level of the final output. As a rule, it can be established that lamps with good operating phosphors emit about 20 percent to 25 percent of their electrical input as UV radiation.
Creating Different Tanning Lamps
The different types of tanning lamps, or, the different radiation spectra of lamps, are determined by the phosphors used and by the UV-transmission properties of the lamp glass.
The phosphor determines the main spectral properties of the emitted radiation. Even though the short-wave radiation hitting the phosphor layer is always the same, the different types of phosphor used produce different emission spectra, thus creating different lamps.
Lamp characteristics, such as maximum radiant flux or the bandwidth of the spectrum, are closely determined by the phosphor type used. Therefore, it is essential to pinpoint a suitable phosphor type for tanning purposes. The emission has to fulfill the spectral prerequisites for good tanning efficiency or the lamp will not provide a satisfactory output performance.
This is one of the reasons that only a few manufacturers are able to offer lamps with distinctly different properties—for example, lamps for fast tanning or lamps for the gentle tanning of sensitive-skinned people.
Lamp output also may be altered by the degree to which the lamp glass allows or inhibits the passage of ultraviolet light. Generally, radiation in the short wave range up to about 330 nm is more affected by the glass. It is possible, for example, to control the UVB/UVA ratio to some extent by using different glass types that have different UV-transmission ratings. In such cases, the glass acts as a filter. Most manufacturers typically apply only one type of glass in their entire tanning lamp program. However, the choice of glass can have a remarkable influence on the UV output of a lamp.
RUVA Lamps
More than a decade ago, a new type of lamp was introduced for indoor tanning. Rather than relying on external reflectors to prevent any light from being lost from the rear of the lamps, these so-called reflector or RUVA lamps each have an internal reflective coating that typically covers a 220-degree area of the inside of the lamp. This focuses all output through the front end of the lamp.
While the orientation of their output is different, standard and reflector lamps do not differ in their technical efficiency at producing UV rays. In fact, the same type of phosphor usually is used in both reflector and standard lamps, so the outputs of both types have similar spectral properties.
Why then introduce reflector lamps to the tanning market? The answer is simple: RUVA lamps provide a more intense UV output, thereby reducing the required exposure times.
Each individual lamp, with its builtin reflector, assures that the UV rays developed inside of the lamp reach the skin directly virtually without any loss. Since external reflectors of the type normally mounted in tanning units are then not necessary, reflector tanning beds make it possible for lamps to be mounted closer together. In return, this means more output without needing more space, resulting in a higher intensity of tanning rays.
Furthermore, the absence of external reflectors simplifies the handling and cleaning of RUVA tanning beds and saves a great deal of maintenance.
But with more lamps, more heat is produced. For this reason, manufacturers of tanning beds with closely mounted reflector lamps must have an appropriate cooling system in the unit in order to guarantee optimal working conditions. Otherwise, either the output or the useful life of the lamps will be decreased.
The UVB/UVA ratio, often called the UVB percentage, also becomes important when discussing reflector lamps. Remember that the UVB ratio only indicates the levels of UVA and UVB relative to one another and not the absolute output of either. If an enhancement of the UVA output takes place, the amount of UVB produced increases by the same factor. Compared to tanning units with standard sunlamps at a given ratio then, RUVA units with reflector lamps of the same UVB ratio will produce higher absolute levels of UVB.
Because skin reddening, or erythema, is produced primarily by exposure to UVB, the erythemal threshold dose could be theoretically reached more quickly with RUVA equipment, so the exposure time must be reduced to compensate. In terms of exposure time then, reflector lamps of a given UVB ratio generally are comparable to standard lamps with a higher UVB percentage. This is due to the higher overall output of the RUVA lamps, resulting in the same level of UVB, even though the percentage is less.
Today’s lamp manufacturers produce such a wide variety of products that to classify them would be difficult. However, some general guidelines regarding the output of reflector lamps would be useful.
Early reflector lamps emitted a narrow spectrum, primarily concentrated in the UVA range, hence the “UVA” in RUVA. While the high UVA output darkened existing pigment grains in the skin, the extremely low UVB produced did little to stimulate the production of additional melanin. For example, a RUVA lamp with a UVB percentage of 0.1 percent does not emit enough UVB to stimulate melanin production. For the level of UVB to be high enough at this ratio, prohibitively high levels of UVA would be produced. Recently, RUVA lamps emitting more UVB have been introduced.
A UVB percentage of about 0.7 percent can result in acceptable immediate tanning, but also gently induces pigment formation, making this reflector lamp suitable for tanning light, sensitive skin.
A slightly higher UVB/UVA ratio, in the neighborhood of 1.3 percent, for example, is a fairly standard RUVA lamp and works well for normal skin that tans readily without burning.
Reflector lamps also are available with still higher UVB ratios. A ratio of 2 percent at emission levels present in RUVA lamps will be very effective in tanning, but is not recommended for use on sensitive skin.
This short summary shows that the range offered on reflector lamps corresponds to that of standard tanning lamps. The decision to use standard vs. reflector lamps really depends upon the type of tanning unit used, the exposure times wanted and personal preference. However, equipment must be specifically designed to use reflector lamps and they should not be installed in a unit that is not so made, nor should standard lamps be used in a unit made for RUVA lamps.
VHO Lamps
In addition to standard, professional and reflector lamps, there also are VHO or Very High Output lamps for tanning. Standard and professional lamps differ from one another mainly by spectrum— in general, professional lamps show a higher UVB percentage—and reflector lamps, which have a reflector built into the lamp itself, enable the rays to be focused and therefore more intense.
VHO lamps feature a significantly higher power consumption generally between 140 watts to 160 watts for the same size lamp. These lamps have two distinct quality features that clearly standout.
First, electrically the VHO has an actual power consumption of 160 watt for the 6-foot lamp and 140 watts for the 5-foot lamp. Second, the VHO has an additional physical feature built inside the lamp: longer electrodes with a cooling zone at each lamp end. These cooling zones permit the VHO lamps their exceptional qualities. Be aware that VHO lamps do not produce any output within the range of the cooling zones, therefore the ends of the lamps seem dark. However, these dark zones have nothing in common with the blackening of the ends (electrode area) that may occur in conventional fluorescent lamps after several operating hours. The dark zones of the VHO lamp, rather, guarantee the proper operation of the lamp.
Proper cooling is extremely important with VHO lamps. Compared to conventional tanning lamps, there is a 60 percent higher thermal strain along the glass because of the increased power consumption. Without a sufficiently dimensioned cooling zone, the VHO lamp would become too hot during operation, resulting in a reduction in the electrical discharge that is responsible for generating the output. Therefore, the cooling zone ensures the optimum electrical discharge.
New VHO lamps, especially after shipment, are not ready for use immediately after installation. A burn-in phase is needed for the lamp to reach its thermal balance. This is when the gases within the lamp have dispersed entirely throughout, thereby creating an even output along the whole length of the lamp. If the VHO lamp were operated in a unit without any cooling, a thermal balance would be reached after 15 to 30 minutes; however, a burn-in phase of two to three hours is quite usual for operation in a normally functioning unit.
It is important that the ends of VHO lamps are cooled properly. In order to maximize the output of the lamps, the cooling air stream should be led over the lamp in a way that the cooling zones receive optimal cooling.
High-Pressure Lamps
The high-pressure lamp is filled with mercury vapor and emits a spectrum that can be made ideal for tanning purposes. Compared to low-pressure lamps, high levels of radiation in the UVA range are produced, resulting in a strong immediate tanning effect.
Apart from the UVA, other rays also are found in the emitted radiation, mainly UVC, UVB, visible light and infrared radiation. The undesirable radiation, however, is removed by the use of filters. The appropriate filter should be fitted by the manufacturer of the tanning apparatus. Extreme accuracy is practiced in the production of these lamps.
Very high radiation intensities can be achieved using high-pressure mercury lamps. The high-pressure lamp is particularly suitable for use in combination with reflectors, where the lamp can be efficiently employed for radiating both large and small areas.
The development of high-pressure tanning in the late ‘70s was partly a response to the customer’s desire for a fast, efficient method of tanning indoors. Although quite popular in Europe for several years, high-pressure tanning has come into its own in the U.S. market. Although more expensive than many low-pressure units, manufacturers and distributors are educating salon owners about the advantages and profitability of such systems as a viable tanning option.
Using UVA certainly can stimulate melanin and produce a cosmetic tan. However, UVA sometimes has been mistakenly labeled as the safe UVA ray. The use of high-pressure (or any type of indoor tanning equipment) should not be advertised as a safe or safer alternative. The FDA guidelines on indoor tanning forbids such claims.
Compared to low-pressure lamps, the application of high-pressure lamps requires a higher standard of care. This is largely caused by two factors:
(1) High-pressure lamps emit a broad spectrum of radiation which covers a wavelength range starting with the shortwave UV range (generally even below 250 nm) up to the Infrared Light Range.
(2) In addition, these rays are produced in high intensities, depending on the power output.
It is, therefore, subject to FDA regulations that govern the application and the trade of high-pressure sunlamps. This is in contrast to Europe, where such lamps may be sold and installed with few restrictions. This is particularly true for regulations regarding the replacement of such lamps. According to regulations, the user only may replace high-pressure lamps if the lamps show a UVC-UVB ratio of more than three.
According to industry veterans, tanning lamps show the highest decline in their output performance during the first 100 hours of operation. For this reason, some manufacturers define their lamps nominal output performance after 100 hours of operation.
The drop in power between zero and 100 hours generally amounts to about 10 percent to 20 percent, depending on the properties of the phosphor used inside the lamp. Most of the published maintenance curves were obtained with free-burning lamps under optimal operating conditions. Therefore, the actual decline in output of lamps in tanning units often differs significantly from the corresponding declarations.
A definite recommendation cannot be given, however, as a rule, lamps should be replaced when they reach a decline of 70 percent of their starting performance. In other words, the decrease in power should not exceed 30 percent. This basic rule will assure the tanning effectiveness of your lamps over their useful life.
There are two different classes of phosphor available for tanning lamps. One type is used in standard tanning lamps and shows a stronger decline in performance, recommending replacement after about 300 hours to 500 hours of operation. Another type of phosphor is considerably more expensive and largely used in the professional market of tanning lamps. The gradual decline in performance of these lamps extends their useful life up to 800 to 1,000 hours.
The best way to monitor the decreasing output performance of tanning lamps to determine the right time for replacement is to use a pocket-sized UVA meter. Generally, a UVA meter of this kind is not suitable for measuring the absolute UVA irradiance of tanning lamps with different emission spectra.
Showing a relative measurement of irradiance tells the age of lamps. The UVA meter is easy to use, if certain steps are followed:
- Take an initial reading upon the installation of new lamps.
- Make sure the measuring conditions always are kept the same. Measure at the same location of your tanning unit, at the same distance and observe the same electrical conditions for each single measurement.
- Make sure that the acrylics and reflectors are clean. It is imperative that acrylics are changed according to the manufacturer’s specifications.
- Wait for your measurement until your tanning unit is in a state of “thermal equilibrium,” which takes about 20 minutes to 30 minutes after turning it on.
If these steps are followed, measurement readings for comparative purposes will be obtained. Pocket-sized UVA meters are used to measure UVA values. Although these meters only register UVA levels, it can be assumed that the UVB values will diminish by approximately the same relative amount.
Equipment-Related Factors
The total operating time of the lamps is probably the most important factor determining output performance. However, some additional factors stem from the tanning unit used and how well it is functioning.
Equipment-related factors such as dirty or dusty reflectors will reduce power. They can be avoided by regularly cleaning your equipment. Other factors include the permeability of the acrylic cover and the cooling system.
Be sure to check that the reduction of irradiance is not due to insufficient permeability or penetration of the acrylic sheet. Simply use your UVA meter and compare the readings made with and without the acrylic sheet.
Acrylic care is probably the most overlooked element to tanning bed maintenance. It must be noted that it is essential to optimize lamp performance through the use of acrylics that allow for proper transmission of UV energy.
If UVA readings obtained with the acrylic sheet on the tanning unit are more than 20 percent lower compared to those without the sheet, you probably have an aging acrylic sheet that acts as a filter. Additionally, yellowing of the cut edges on acrylics indicates it is time to replace the acrylic sheet. It is important that the acrylics be changed with the manufacturer’s specifications.
As is generally known, a lamp can provide maximum power only if it is operated within an optimum temperature range that is approximately 108 degrees Fahrenheit. If the temperature is too low or too high, it will lead to a drop in output. To check whether the cooling system of your unit conforms to the optimal operating conditions of the lamps, the following procedure can be recommended.
During the warm-up phase of up to approximately 30 minutes after switching on your unit, constantly record the UVA irradiance by use of a UVA meter. The best readings will be obtained in the center of the tanning area. If the reading becomes steady at maximum UVA values, it can be assumed that the cooling of the unit is proportioned correctly.
On the other hand, if the measured values pass through a maximum before settling at a lower reading, the flow of cooling air is probably too weak. If there is a constant rise, in the readings throughout the entire warm-up phase, but without a noticeable maximum being obtained, this should be interpreted as a sign that the unit may be over-cooled. Such problems can be adjusted if the unit allows you to change the cooling air flow. If not, contact the manufacturer of the unit.
The fluorescent lamp is composed of seven main parts:
(1) Base—connects the lamp to an external source of power.
(2) Lead-in Wires—connect the base to the cathode, which emits electrons during lamp operation.
(3) Mercury—atoms in the form of a vapor in the lamp which are struck by the electrons and excited from their ground state to a higher state, from which they emit a UV photon with a wavelength of 254 nm.
(4) Phosphor—absorbs this UV and converts it to longer wavelengths (usually visible light). It is coated onto the inside of the lamp during lamp manufacturing.
(5) Stem Press—is a cathode support structure as well as the means to hermetically seal the lamp ends.
(6) Exhaust Tube—is the means of introducing the fill gas and mercury into the lamp during processing. It is then closed off.
(7) Fill Gas—is an inert gas which aids in starting and operating the fluorescent lamps.
UVB To UVA Ratio
There are many myths or misconceptions in the marketplace today about tanning lamps. How often should lamps be changed or cleaned? What percentage is best for the UVB/UVA ratio? Which lamps tan better and quicker than others? These are only a few of the many questions that make an intelligent buying decision a rather difficult task.
However, as difficult as the task may appear, once a basic understanding of light and its relation to the tanning process has been established, tanning lamps are no longer a complicated or ambiguous mechanism.
Although light appears to be a simple concept, it is quite complex in structure and can be broken down into eight different categories that comprise the entire light spectrum— Cosmic Rays, Gamma Rays, X-Rays, Ultraviolet Rays, Visible Rays, Infrared Rays and Radio Waves.
With indoor tanning, we are primarily interested in ultraviolet rays that are invisible to the human eye and potentially the most dangerous. Within the ultraviolet spectrum, there are basically three different rays with which we must be familiar—UVA, UVB and UVC.
UVC rays have the shortest wavelength of all ultraviolet rays and, therefore, are potentially the most dangerous. Experts maintain that all UVC rays are absorbed by the earth’s atmosphere, but there is currently a debate going on between scientists as to whether the ozone layer of our atmosphere (the layer which absorbs UVC rays) is breaking down and allowing UVC rays to penetrate to the earth.
Our skin color is determined by the skin pigment melanin, the presence and quality of which are determined by hereditary factors. In people with darker skin types, the pigment grains are larger and distributed more homogeneously throughout the epidermis in contrast to people with a lighter skin color.
Tanning, which is exposure to ultraviolet radiation, is called facultative pigmentation and causes the skin’s natural color to darken. Tanning of the skin is a function that protects against the harmful effect of excessive solar radiation. However, the results of this protection can be very attractive, appealing and healthy-looking.
Medical authorities have cautioned against absorbing too much of the sun’s hazardous rays. Regardless, there are still those people who continue to expose themselves to the sun or tan in tanning beds too long. The wrong types or too much exposure to ultraviolet rays can result in sunburning, wrinkling, premature aging and leathering of the skin. The various types and amounts of ultraviolet light determine the degree of the tan.
Tanning lamps are designed to emit only the necessary combinations of UVA and UVB rays that will stimulate the body’s natural tanning process. When compared to natural sunlight, tanning lamps appear to be much safer because they can control the time and amount of exposure as well as the combination of ultraviolet rays. This is not possible with the sun.
UVB rays activate the production of melanin while UVA rays oxidize the melanin, gradually turning the skin tones to tan. However, UVB is also primarily responsible for sunburn and must be carefully limited.
Currently, there are no standards that the FDA recognizes to rate lamps. Almost everyone in the industry seems to be talking about the UVB/UVA ratio in tanning lamps. However, it seems as though the whole ratio concept has been blown out of proportion and grossly misunderstood. Although the ratio between UVA and UVB is very important, the actual amount of energy output in lamps is more important. For instance, a lamp that has been operating for more than 1,000 hours can have almost no energy output, yet maintain the same ratio of UVB/UVA. Although the ratio remains the same, a person could lie under such a lamp for hours and never receive a tan.
In the early stages of tanning, some lamps incorporated similar phosphors. During the past few years, there has been a proliferation of these phosphors and now, some companies use different combinations of phosphors to achieve the desired results. Many of these new phosphors are much more efficient in producing ultraviolet energy and can emit much higher amounts of it.
The actual level of energy output, combined with the spectral distribution of the rays is what determines the tanning effectiveness of a lamp. The ratio gives an idea of the spectral distribution, but not of the actual levels involved.
Therefore, what seems most important now is not the ratio of UVB to UVA, but the actual levels of output across the entire spectrum. From a biological point of view, a fairly high percentage of UVB has a disproportionate effect in the sense that the chances of overexposure increase relatively quickly as the degree of UVB in the radiation increases. A high UVB content necessitates the radiation times being kept short.
Radiation without any UVB is another extreme. This would require such a high radiation intensity that the radiation would prove an unpleasant and even intolerable experience. For that reason, FDA regulations control output according to spectral intensity, rather than percentage.
As a salon owner, you should seek a ratio of UVB to UVA that offers the minimum risk of overexposure and yet allows a reasonably short period of radiation. Most tanning lamp manufacturers keep this concept in mind.
Once a tanning bed is manufactured and its exposure schedule is determined, the FDA only authorizes the use of lamps with similar output for use as replacements in that particular bed. The manufacturers of replacement lamps are required to demonstrate to the FDA that their lamps meet the compatibility requirements specified in the code for them to be marketed as replacements for other lamp models. They are shipped with labeling indicating the models of lamps for which they may be used as replacements.
Recertification
Alternately, the FDA permits the use of what would be non-equivalent lamps in equipment, provided that testing is conducted and filed with the agency to determine a new exposure schedule for the unit with the new lamps. This is known as recertification. The new exposure schedule then is shipped with the lamps and, as long as it is observed, the unit remains in compliance with the code. Some lamp manufacturers are in the process of conducting such testing for models in their particular lines so they may be used with most popular models of tanning equipment.
If there are any questions regarding the type of lamps that should be used for replacements, a call to the manufacturer should be placed. Manufacturers of lamps are required to submit evidence to the FDA that authorizes them to claim compatibility with other lamps and, thus, allows for the replacement as well. A salon owner should be very careful to make sure that he replaces the lamp with compatible lamps approved by the FDA.
The Effects Of External Factors On Tanning Lamps
The overall effectiveness of a tanning unit ultimately depends on the irradiance that actually reaches the exposed skin, which is not necessarily the same as that originally produced by the lamp. The total irradiance on the skin is influenced by a number of external factors including the distance between the radiation source and the skin, the optical components of the equipment and the specific working conditions.
Irradiation Distance
In the case of most tanning beds and booths, the irradiation distance is determined by the construction of the tanning unit and cannot be changed by the user. In those cases where it is variable, the user should be aware of a basic relationship: The greater the distance, the less the received irradiation. Usually, the instructions accompanying such equipment advise the user as to the best distance for operation.
As a rule of thumb, it can be recommended that the distance not exceed 20 cm to 30 cm (approximately eight inches to 12 inches) with a low-pressure unit. The received irradiance decreases considerably at greater distances and becomes more and more ineffective.
With high-pressure units, the best distance may vary from unit to unit in order to avoid any unpleasant irritation of the skin as a result of excess heat development.
Optical Components
There are three specific optical components in a tanning unit: the radiation source itself, the external reflector and the filter system and/or acrylic sheet. In general, all of the optical components are installed by the manufacturer, so the user has only very limited possibilities to make alterations, except for replacing the lamps or acrylic sheet.
The Radiation Source
Commonly, the radiation source produces non-directed rays in different wavelength ranges. The degree of radiation intensity at certain wavelengths is derived from the relative spectral power distribution or, in short, from the spectrum. While the spectrum largely depends on the lamp type, the actual output performance also is determined by the working conditions.
In general, high-pressure tanning lamps, also referred to as metal halide lamps, produce a wide spectrum ranging from short-wave ultraviolet rays of about 250 nm up to rays in the infrared range. For that reason it is not possible to use these lamps without additional filters. As a consequence, other optical parts of high-pressure equipment affect the spectrum as well as the output to a considerable extent.
In contrast, the spectrum produced by low-pressure equipment is restricted largely to the tanning UV range from 300 nm to 400 nm. Consequently, any additional filter systems to a large are unnecessary. Therefore, the performance qualities of low-pressure tanning units are dependent primarily on the spectrum and the output of lamps used.
External Reflectors
The reflector is designed to focus and concentrate the lamp’s rays in the desired direction. In order to do this as effectively as possible, which means without any significant loss of intensity and without spectral changes, the distinct shape of the reflector and the material of which it is made play important roles.
Under normal conditions, neither the shape nor the properties of the reflector material change substantially with increasing operating time. However, the reflector surface dirties easily which leads to a loss of intensity, so regular cleaning is necessary to maintain its effectiveness. Dusty or stained reflectors can reduce output performance up to 20 percent and more.
Filters
The purpose of filter glass is to eliminate or reduce specific rays that are produced by the lamp but are not desirable. With increasing operating time, the filter may age and its filtering properties may undergo changes, usually resulting in an overall loss of intensity. However, extremes of temperature also may alter the filter’s effectiveness, making some filters more or less transparent to short-wave UV rays.
Acrylics
The acrylic in low-pressure units usually separates lamps from the user. The sheet’s ability to transmit almost never alters the spectral distribution and at the most can cause a reduction in total intensity. A new sheet should affect the total irradiance by no more than 10 percent.
After hundreds hours of operation, the acrylic can age, resulting first in less transmission of UVB rays and later to decreased UVA output. If the UVA reading obtained with the sheet in place shows a 20-percent or greater decrease in output as compared to the reading at the same distance from the naked lamps, the sheet is clearly over-aged and should be replaced. At that point, it also may show some yellowing of cut edges.
Both filter glass and acrylic sheets should be cleaned regularly in order to prevent reduced output. Because of static charges, dust constantly will adhere to filters and acrylic and impair transmission of tanning rays. Consult the acrylic manufacturer to determine the longevity of your shield.
Working Conditions
Operating conditions such as electrical factors and especially heat can have a considerable influence on the output and operable lifespan of tanning lamps.
Electrical Conditions
Both low-pressure and high-pressure tanning lamps are developed for closely defined electrical working conditions. In order to ensure reliable performance, precisely suitable ballasts are required to stabilize current flow for proper operation.
In the case of unsuitable ballasts, it can happen that the lamps are operated with a higher current than assigned. Although the initial effect may be a higher output performance, the lamp will run continually in an overloaded state and its operable life will be decreased or, in extreme cases, it could prematurely fail altogether. Further, the operating temperature of the lamps will be increased which could create problems for the unit’s cooling system.
On the other hand, a lamp current that is too low will proportionally decrease the produced radiation intensity. A similar situation also exists in regard to electrical voltage. Therefore, it is very important to follow the lamp manufacturers’ recommended electrical operating data to maximize lifespan and output.
Thermal Conditions
Because the radiation produced in both low- and high-pressure tanning lamps results from an electrical discharge, the pressure of the gas filling inside the lamp must be maintained accurately in order to obtain the optimal radiation intensity. Since gas pressure is directly dependent on the temperature, lamps should be operated very close to their temperature optimum.
In the case of low-pressure lamps, the optimal operating temperature lies at about 104 degrees Fahrenheit. Either higher or lower temperatures will lead to a decline in produced radiation intensity. A loss of intensity on the order of 5 percent to 10 percent caused by thermal deviation of about 50 degrees Fahrenheit is not unusual in units with unbalanced cooling systems.
High-pressure lamps can handle far heavier heat loads than their low-pressure counterparts despite their smaller dimensions. Therefore, with high-pressure lamps the situation is different. Premature failures usually are linked to overloads of thermal or electrical nature. High-pressure lamps reach their optimal operating temperature at about 1,472 degrees Fahrenheit.
Below 1,292 degrees Fahrenheit the spectrum that is produced is incomplete because the metal halides in the lamp have not evaporated yet. Thermal overloads, on the other hand, inevitably lead to early failures. At temperatures above about 1,742 degrees Fahrenheit, the quartz glass softens and allows the lamp to expand, resulting in deformation. The changes in the size and shape of the lamp alter the pressure of the enclosed gases, making further operation impossible. Such defects often are observed in facial tanners as a result of insufficient cooling.
Although only a few of the effects of external factors on tanning lamps are discussed herein, it becomes obvious that manufacturers of indoor tanning units must consider a number of specific technical requirements in designing equipment to produce optimal tanning effectiveness. Optical, as well as electrical components and the operating conditions of the unit as a whole, must harmonize with one another to maximize the output performance of the lamps.
Since the tanning lamp is one of the most crucial variables in the indoor tanning equation, salon owners must not sacrifice quality for price when purchasing them for their salons. Any successful business owner knows that profitability results from more than just hard work and long hours. There are initial investments that must be made to get that business off the ground and running. And, while the necessary capital may sometimes seem extravagant, in the long run it usually pays off. Sometimes, it even means that the company outlives the competition.
Tanning salon owners who have outlasted their competitors also have experienced the benefits of investing in their salons to make them as profitable as possible. While location, signage, advertising and even attractive interiors are important, they know that the foundation for their success lies in their tanning equipment.
One salon owner learned firsthand about the value of high-quality equipment when he purchased the salon from a previous owner. While the former owner had purchased lamps that were among the least expensive ones on the market, the new owner soon realized that their results were less than desirable.
After monitoring his clients’ tanning results over a period of time, the enterprising owner began to notice a pattern: Clients were satisfied initially with the color they got after their first visit to the salon, but once their tan faded they had to come in more often to maintain it.
Additionally, the intensity of the lamps caused clients’ skin to dry out, and the lamps burned out rather quickly. As a result, he estimated that buying the less expensive lamps actually was more costly in the end.
According to the salon owner, there is a common misconception among salon owners and tanners alike that the quicker it takes to get a tan, the better. “Many salon owners concentrate on satisfying their clients who want color fast as their main criteria when purchasing lamps,” he says. “What they don’t realize is that they are actually spending more money in the long run because the lifespan of these high-intensity lamps is significantly less—so their initial purchase may seem cheaper, they will have to change these lamps more often and that adds up.”
He goes on to say that he has educated his staff and clients about the benefits of building a base tan slowly and maintaining a dark skin tone. “In fact, many people do not know that every time they burn their skin, they actually decrease their chances of getting brown later,” he says.
Additionally, another salon owner believes that high-quality lamps are crucial to success. “After two years of using lamps that I was satisfied with, I decided to try a less expensive brand. Looking back, it probably was one of the worst things I could have done for my business,” he says. “The replacement lamps that I used got too hot and as a result so did my customers. The lamps burned so quickly that I had to replace them after 280 hours—so in essence, we all got burned.”
What can other salon owners learn from these testimonies? What qualities should they look for when choosing lamps for their beds?
Besides finding a lamp that is compatible with the beds in their salons, savvy owners also must consider two things:
1. What results are most important to the salon owner?
- Longevity of the lamp;
- Fast results; or
- Both
2. What type of lamp intensity is most often requested by tanners?
Once these factors are considered, salon owners also must figure out how many sessions of use their lamps will provide throughout their “effective life” (hours that the manufacturer attributes to a specific lamp.) To demonstrate the importance of this effort, consider the following example:
In examining these numbers, we can see that Brand A, while being a more expensive brand, has a longer life than Brand B, a compatible lamp. However, despite the price discrepancy, the real issue is how many hours that lamp will service the salon owner. To help prove this point, we have illustrated another equation.
Let’s say that Brand A costs $14.95 per lamp, and the compatible Brand B costs $8.95 per lamp. Multiplying those costs by 24 lamps, we arrive at:
While Brand A costs $144 more than Brand B, in reality, Brand A will generate $8,400 more in revenues for the salon than the other brand. How does this happen? Referring to this example, we see that the revenues generated from Brand A’s lamps equal between $15,600-$18,000 while Brand B’s lamps generate between $7,200-$9,600 in revenues.
So, a salon owner could make as much as $8,400 with Brand A, and he or she won’t have to go through the time-consuming process of relamping (removing and cleaning the acrylics, cleaning the reflectors, removing and replacing the old lamps, putting the acrylics back in) as often. Keep in mind that these numbers would vary depending on the specific conditions of the beds and the salons. (Heat, acrylics, dust, voltage and bed manufacturer are all determining factors.)
While this example is merely representative of information that has been researched with the assistance of salon owners nationwide, it clearly demonstrates the importance of investing in high-quality equipment that will go the distance while providing the desired results for both salon owners and tanners alike.
Understanding tanning lamp mechanics is of utmost importance for proper maintenance and care. And although lamps may seem simple to order and replace, they are complex components that figure heavily into the overall tanning process.
Each lamp manufacturer has its own definition of useful life for its product, and each tanning salon has its own set of operating conditions. Although both these points are not very helpful in answering the question of when you should replace your lamps, there are some guidelines that can help determine the right point in time.
It seems that the best and most reliable means of determining when lamps should be replaced is through the correct use of a UV meter. The basic rule is when the output level has dropped to 70 percent to 75 percent of what it was when the lamps were new, the lamps should be replaced.
It is generally during the first 100 hours of operation that sunlamps show the highest decline in their output performance. For this reason, some manufacturers define their lamps nominal output performance after 100 hours of operating.
The drop in power between zero and 100 hours can amount to about 10 percent to 20 percent, depending on the properties of the phosphor used inside the lamp. Most of the published maintenance curves were obtained with “free burning” lamps under optimal operating conditions. Therefore, the actual decline in the output of lamps in tanning beds often differs significantly when taken from the salon environment.
The measurement of UVA (or total UV) irradiance is often part of a daily routine for indoor tanning salon operators. For reasons of practicality and cost, the UVA measuring instrument preferred for this purpose is generally the pocket-sized type.
We all understand that the UVA reading plays an important part in deciding when to replace tanning lamps. For financial reasons and customer satisfaction, there should be the best possible assurance that the salon owner can depend on the readout from his or her UV meter.
A UVA meter can be a great tool when used properly; however, all too often salon owners think it is an exact measurement for output, but instead it is relative. If salon owners choose to rely on the UV meter then they should be sure to follow the same format for measuring output including:
- Take an initial reading upon the installation of new lamps.
- Make sure the measuring conditions always are kept the same. Measure at the same location of your tanning unit, at the same distance, observe the same electrical conditions for each single measurement.
- Make sure that the acrylics and reflectors are clean. It is imperative that acrylics are changed according to the manufacturer’s specifications.
- Wait with your measurement until your tanning unit is in a state of thermal equilibrium, which takes about five to 10 minutes after turning it on.
If these steps are carried out, measurement readings for comparative purposes will be obtained. Pocket-sized meters are used to measure a variety of UV bandwidths. Even if your meter only registers UVA levels, it can be assumed that the UVB values will diminish by approximately the same relative amount.
You can check individual lamps at the acrylic, or take an average body reading in the middle of the bed. Body position is generally considered to be 25 cm above the bench, with meter pointed up at the closed canopy.
Accuracy Of Measurements
In general, the accuracy of UV readings on digital displays is sometimes overestimated. Renowned universities consider an absolute accuracy of between 5 percent and 10 percent as very good. Therefore, for some low-cost UV meters that operate under much less controlled conditions, considerably greater measuring errors could be expected.
For example, it is known that with some low-cost UV meters, the readings for one and the same radiation source differ by up to 20 percent to 30 percent between identical products from the same manufacturer.
Some manufacturers of UV meters do provide calibration accuracy of plus or minus 5 percent to 10 percent reference NIST traceability, so it’s important to look for that specification to minimize error potential.
UVB Measurement
It is more difficult for a hand-held meter to isolate the UVB bandwidth (280- 320 nm) from the total UV bandwidth (280-400 nm). Hence UVB measurement can be more problematic. And since the primary purpose of using a UV meter is to tell the salon owner when to replace his or her lamps, the measurement of UVB values is not necessary for that purpose because UVA and UVB irradiance drop by about the same relative amount.
However, a very important usage of a UVB meter is to check acrylic transmission. Solarized and aged acrylic blocks a significant amount of UVB, while allowing most UVA to transmit through it. Only a UVB meter that has a selective 280- 320 nm filter can display this problem. Another usage for a UVB meter is to divide the reading by UVA value and obtain an estimation of percent UVB.
Lamp Output
When examining the output performance of a lamp, as a rule, about 20 percent to 25 percent of the electrical input will be emitted as ultraviolet radiation. Yet, this only is true for new lamps that are in optimal operating conditions—meaning that the electrical conditions such as supplied voltage, lamp current and wattage meet the specifications of the lamp manufacturer. Ballasts and starters—if used— also play an important role. The two major factors responsible for the actual performance of a tanning unit are the aging of the lamps over time and equipment characteristics of the tanning unit.
Any radiation source loses a certain degree of power the longer it is in operation. For example, the reduction in power hardly is noticed in the general lighting of private households. In general, incandescent or fluorescent lamps are not replaced until they stop functioning.
Unfortunately, this is not as simple with the UV lamps used for indoor tanning. Tanning units are expected to meet certain requirements with respect to their tanning effectiveness over a given period of time. With increased use, they are no longer able to meet such expectations because of a marked performance decline, even though they are still in full working order from an electrical point of view. With tanning lamps, the recommended useful life is considerably shorter than the electrical life.
Normally, manufacturers give recommendations on the useful life of their lamps, but these recommendations only can be used as a guide because there is no clear and official definition of the term useful life. Each manufacturer can make its own definition. Additionally, different operating conditions, as well as equipment-related factors, have in certain cases a considerable effect on the actual useful life of a tanning lamp.
Although both of these points are not very helpful in answering the question, “When should lamps be replaced?”, there are some guidelines which help determine the right point in time.
Measuring Different Types Of Lamps
Experience has proven that measuring different types of sunlamps with a UVA or total UV meter usually proves problematic in practice. The deviation of the UV meter from the actual measured value varies from spectrum to spectrum. As a rule, UVA readings obtained on different types of lamps are not comparable for effectiveness.
If lamp (A) shows a reading of 20 mW/cm, and lamp (B) shows 15 mW/cm, this does not generally mean that lamp (B) has a 25 percent lower effectiveness. If there is a clear distinction between the spectral characteristics of both lamps, it is perfectly possible that lamp (B) has higher UVB with lower UVA and tans in a lower session time.
That is because the irradiance readings from UVA and UVB meters are unweighted and do not correlate to the erythemal action spectrum (EAS). The EAS weights 297 nm and below very high, and 298 out to 400 nm progressively lower.
For measuring different types of lamps’ erythemal effectiveness, an MED/hr meter must be used. If its sensor response curve accurately follows EAS weighting, it will yield EAS in much the same manner as spectroradiometers do for FDA determination of Te maximum timer interval of (4) MEDs (minimum erythemal doseage).
This information is intended to emphasize the fact that low-cost, pocketsize UV meters are suitable for a variety of distinct purposes, depending on their specific response.
- UVA (or total UV): Relative measurements for lamp aging.
- UVB: Acrylic transmission and percentage of UVB.
- MED: Erythemally weighted effectiveness.
Salon owners should not rely solely on customer response regarding the output of the lamps, due to the many and varied skin types and base tan levels. They should follow a typical lamp maintenance and replacement routine in order to provide their customers with consistent tans year-round.
Compatibility
The subject of lamp compatibility, substantial equivalency and recommended relamping procedures poses several concerns for responsible salon owners and operators who are tying to conduct business within the guidelines established by the FDA, local authorities and the original equipment manufacturers. The following is a brief overview that should be reviewed by all your employees.
It generally is agreed that tanning lamps should be replaced when their output drops below 65 percent to 70 percent of the level when they were new. In operating time, this is generally between 700 and 1,000 hours, although some longer maintenance models may last as long as 1,500 hours with proper care.
When approaching this procedure, the obvious first question is, what can be used for replacement? The physical dimensions of a lamp obviously could preclude its use in certain units. A 72-inch lamp obviously will not fit into a unit designed to use 59-inch lamps. And the voltage requirements of a lamp must match the tanning unit’s output. However, there are other factors that might make a lamp good for one tanning bed and incorrect for another.
One basic factor is the connector type. Tanning lamps are available in either Recessed Double Contact (RDC) or Bi-pin configurations. The bi-pin lamp has two pins protruding in a side-by-side arrangement on each end; the RDC type of lamp has two contacts on each end housed in a plastic post. The two types are not interchangeable.
Also, distinctly different types of lamps, including standard lowpressure, RUVA and VHO lamps are not interchangeable. Different lamp types have individual operating requirements determined by their particular design.
For example, RUVA lamps have a reflecting panel built into the lamp itself, eliminating the need for external reflectors in the tanning unit. This means there is a distinct front and back to the lamp, as the reflective panel must face toward the tanner. Tanning units that use this type of lamp generally place them closer together than do those using traditional lamps.
Both RUVA and VHO lamps also generate more heat than normal low-pressure lamps, making a more powerful cooling system within the tanning unit necessary. To summarize, lamps of any design should be used only in equipment that is designed for them.
Revisions to the FDA regulations bearing on tanning products fortunately take much of the guesswork out of choosing replacement lamps. To be compliant, a replacement lamp must be plus or minus 10 percent the erythemegenic and melanogenic output of the original lamp. It does not attend to the maintenance value or type of tan given by the original lamp. Since the procedures and testing necessary to satisfy the regulations are beyond the capabilities of almost any salon, primary determination of whether a replacement lamp is compatible is the responsibility of the lamp manufacturer.
Once the compatibility is established, the FDA requires the lamp manufacturer to print somewhere on the lamp or its packaging the specific lamp models that the new lamp is designed to replace. If the labeling doesn’t say that the lamp is a direct replacement for a specific lamp, odds are it is not. It is important to remember that just because a lamp physically may fit into a tanning unit, it is not necessarily designed for use in that unit.
Salon owners should be aware than an FDA inspector or state regulator may visit their salon without notice. If the original lamp or an FDA compatible lamp is not being used in the tanning unit, they may prevent the salon owner from using the equipment unit it is in compliance.
Additionally, lamp manufacturers are required to file appropriate paperwork with the FDA for its replacement lamp products. Salon owners should have all the necessary paperwork on hand to show that the lamps are compatible.
The following has been excerpted from an FDA-published document, Sunlamp Products Performance Standard, and is presented as general information for the suntanning device owner or operator:
The Sunlamp Product Performance Standard, 21 CFR 1040.20, applies to (1) any sunlamp product “designed to incorporate one or more ultraviolet lamps and intended for irradiation of any part of the living human body, by ultraviolet radiation with wavelengths in air between 180 and 320 nanometers,
to induce skin tanning,” and (2) any ultraviolet lamp “which produces radiation in the wavelength interval of 180 to 320 nanometers in air and is intended for use in any sunlamp product.” The standard requires the elimination of unnecessary UVC radiation (180 through 260 nanometers) from sunlamp products, that sunlamp products have a timer that limits the duration of UV emission to ten minutes or less with manual recycling provisions, and that protective eyewear be provided with sunlamp products. The hazards due to chronic exposure to UVB radiation, and the use of photosensitizers that interact primarily with UVA radiation are addressed in the form of warning labels on sunlamp products and user information accompanying the product. The conventional RS (reflector spot) sunlamp, the bi-pin fluorescent type sunlamp and the bare quartz sunlamp, examples of the products for which the sunlamp standard originally was developed, emit a relatively high percentage of UVB radiation (8 percent to 58 percent). Sunlamp product manufacturers recently have developed sunlamps for which the ratio of UVA to UVB emissions have been adjusted so that only a relatively small quantity of UVB (two percent or less) is emitted compared to the much higher quantity of UVA radiation and there is no measurable UVC radiation below 260 nanometers. These sunlamps require a much longer exposure to cause erythema and/or tanning and the acute hazard of severe sunburn appears to be reduced greatly. Consequently, the question has been raised concerning which sunlamp products are subject to the Sunlamp Product Performance Standard, 21 CFR 1040.20.
The position of the Bureau of Radiological Health is that the performance standard (21 CFR 1040.20) applies to all sunlamp products (including UVA sunlamp products) or ultraviolet lamps intended for skin tanning which emit ultraviolet radiation with wavelengths in air between 180 and 320 nanometers.
Recommended initial exposure intervals for skin tanning products that emit 2 percent or less of UVB radiation are often in excess of one-half hour duration. Since these lengthy exposure intervals do not appear to pose severe erythema problems, the bureau will be amendable to variance requests for an extension of the maximum timer interval (21 CFR 1040.20(c)(20) and modification of the wording of warning labels (21 CFR 1040.20(d) to achieve the same degree of safety and freedom from hazard intended by the standard. Also, the Bureau will consider amendments to the sunlamp standard to eliminate the need for variances for sunlamp products that emit a low percentage of UVB radiation. Since sunlamp products which emit 2 percent or less of UVB radiation were not considered in formulating the standard and variances from certain requirements may be appropriate, the Bureau of Radiological Health will not take enforcement action against such products for failure to comply if manufactured prior to Oct. 7, 1980. This will allow adequate time for these products to be designed and manufactured in compliance with the standard and for variance applications to be submitted and acted on. However, this policy will not apply to conventional UVB sunlamp products, e.g., the RS sunlamp, bi-pin fluorescent type sunlamp and the quartz sunlamp.
Manufacturers should note that sunlamp products, which emit only UVA radiation and, thus, are not subject to the performance standard for sunlamp products, are still subject to the FDA requirements applicable to medical devices (under the Medical Device Amendments of 1976) and to the defect provisions of the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968 (21 CFR 1003). The equipment recommendations for tanning booths issued by the Bureau of Radiological Health on Nov. 16, 1979, should be considered in any design or testing program for these products. While such items as the 10 minute limit for the timer may not be appropriate, the maximum timer error of + or - 10 percent is still important as is the wearing of appropriate UVA protective eyewear by users.
Possible Amendments
On Feb. 10, 1999 the FDA announced its intent to propose amendments to the performance standard for sunlamp products. The FDA is taking this action to address concerns about the adequacy of the warnings on sunlamp products, current recommended exposure schedule to minimize risks to customers who choose to produce and maintain a tan, current labeling for replacement lamps and current health warnings that do not reflect recent advances in photobiological research.
The Safe Medical Devices Act of 1990, enacted Nov. 28, 1990, transferred the provisions of the Radiation Control for Health Service Act to Chapter V, subchapter C of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. This authority provides for developing, amending and administering radiation safety performance standards for electronic products.
Sunlamp products are Class I medical devices exempt from pre-market modification requirements. These products are intended to provide ultraviolet radiation to tan the skin. As class I devices, sunlamp products are subject to general controls such as registration, listing and current good manufacturing practices. In addition, sunlamp products also are subject to the regulations for electronic product radiation control.
The sunlamp performance standard originally was published in the Federal Register on Nov. 9, 1979. On Sept. 6, 1985, the FDA amended Sec. 1040.20 and made it applicable to all sunlamp products manufactured on or after Sept. 8, 1986. On Aug. 21, 1986, the FDA issued a guidance titled, “Policy on Maximum Timer Interval and Exposure Schedule for Sunlamp Products.” The guidance explained the criteria the FDA uses to evaluate the adequacy of the exposure schedule and the recommended maximum exposure time for sunlamp products. On Sept. 2, 1986, the FDA issued another guidance entitled, “Policy on Lamp Compatibility.” The guidance listed the criteria the FDA uses to evaluate lamp compatibility for sunlamp products.
Before proposing any electronic product performance standards, the FDA is required to consult a statutory advisory committee, the Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee (TEPRSSC). At the Sept. 23-24, 1998 meeting of TEPRSSC, the FDA presented general concepts for amendments to the performance standard for sunlamp products. The committee recommended the FDA pursue development of the amendments and the FDA intends to present more specific proposals to amend the performance standard to TEPRSSC prior to the publication of the proposed rule in the Federal Register.
The FDA is concerned that inadequate attention is being paid to the recommended exposure schedule that was designed to minimize risks for those who choose to produce and maintain a tan. In addition, the FDA is further concerned that the warnings for sunlamp products are not reaching many users of sunlamp products and that the existing exposure schedule does not take into account the variations in individual human UV sensitivity. In order to update the current sunlamp products standards, the FDA is considering revising Sec. 1040.20.
Additionally, sunlamp technology continues to change. These changes can affect both the intensity and the spectral characteristics of UV from sunlamps. Because there is no uniform grading/rating system, choosing a replacement lamp can be confusing for tanning bed owners. Owners choosing replacement lamps must consider lamp compatibility as well as compliance with the FDA’s performance standard in order to protect users from excessive exposure to UV.
The FDA also is aware of new research findings that suggest a stronger association between exposures to UV radiation and the increased incidence of skin cancer that has been observed in the U.S. population. Some of this increase has been linked to intense, intermittent exposures to solar radiation; however, other research suggests that chronic, less intense exposures to UV radiation contribute to skin cancer.
Research has identified the fundamental chemical damage that occurs in the genetic material of humans and has linked some skin cancers to changes in specific genes. These scientific findings had led many in the medical community to strongly suggest that consumers avoid intense, intermittent exposures (the type that could produce sunburns) to UV radiation, and also minimize other UV exposures as well.
Some research has linked skin cancer to exposures to sunlamp products, and some research has even suggested an association between the use of sunlamps and malignant melanoma. This association is not definitive. The FDA solicits comments and information as to whether a warning about possible melanoma induction should be part of sunlamp labels. In order to provide users with sufficient information for the safe use of these devices at tanning salons and for home sunlamp products, the FDA is seeking comments and information on suggested changes to the current sunlamp labels.
After considering the risks, some consumers may still choose to tan, either by exposure to the sun or by use of sunlamp products. Those consumers who use sunlamp products should obtain their tan with the least amount of risk from sunburn and eye damage. Therefore, the FDA seeks advice on a recommended exposure schedule that would minimize the risks of adverse effects while still producing and maintaining a tan.
Revisions Under Consideration
The FDA is considering revising and updating the current sunlamp product performance standard (Sec. 1040.20) and harmonizing it with the International Electrotechnical Committee Standard 335-2-27 for UV- and infrared-emitting appliances. After consulting with international standards organizations and evaluation of the current scientific knowledge, the FDA intends to develop a recommended exposure schedule that will become part of the directions for use of sunlamp products.
As part of the development process, the FDA intends to review the material on the effects of UVA and UVB on skin, the effects of UV exposure on melanoma induction and the use of photobiological action spectra as a basis for risk assessment in health protection and product safety discussed at the American Society for Photobiology and European Society for Photobiology Joint Workshop on UV and Melanoma held in Snowbird, Utah, July 11-15, 1998; the International Symposium and Workshop on Measurements of Optical Radiation Hazards, at the National Institute for Standards and Technology held in Gaithersburg, Md., Sept. 1-3, 1998; and, the Research Workshop on Risks and Benefits of Exposure to Ultraviolet Radiation and Tanning, at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., Sept. 16-18, 1998. The proceedings of these meetings describe current research findings that show a stronger correlation between UV exposure and skin cancer, photoaging and photoimmunological effects.
The FDA also is considering revising and updating its Aug. 21, 1986, guidance on the determination of the maximum timer interval and recommended exposure schedule for sunlamp products entitled, “Policy on Maximum Timer Interval and Exposure Schedule for Sunlamp Products.” The FDA intends to update this guidance after reviewing and evaluating material presented at the meetings listed previously and other available information. In addition, the FDA is further considering incorporating the previous guidance into the sunlamp product performance standard because it believes such incorporation would result in a more comprehensive regulatory standard with all relevant information for compliance in the standard.
Additionally, the FDA is considering adding a provision clarifying that manufacturing includes the modification of a sunlamp product, previously certified under Sec. 1010.2, by any person engaged in the business of manufacturing, assembling or modifying a sunlamp product’s performance, information or intended function for which Sec. 1040.20 has an applicable requirement. This addition would clarify that sunlamp products are being regulated like other products regulated under Sec. 1010.2.
The FDA also is considering requiring the manufacturer who performs such modification to recertify and re-identify the product in accordance with the provisions of Secs. 1010.2 and 1010.3. This potential amendment is intended to clarify the responsibilities of firms and individuals who are in the business of installing UV lamps and new timers with different performance characteristics than the original lamps and timers in previously certified products.
The FDA is concerned that the current warning label is not read by many tanning salon patrons because it is too long and detailed. Therefore, the FDA is considering updating the warning statement required by Sec. 1040.20 (d) (1) (i) to simplify the wording and to highlight the risk of skin cancers. In order to update the warning statements, the FDA intends to review and evaluate epidemiological and mechanistic information on UV exposure-related skin cancers, including possibly fatal cutaneous melanoma.
The FDA also is considering requiring the reproduction of the text of the warning statement specified in Sec. 1040.20 (d) (1) (i) in catalogs, specification sheets and brochures pertaining to sunlamp products.
The FDA is concerned that consumers who purchase sunlamp products through catalog mail order or through catalogs on electronic media may not receive information about the associated hazards and risks until the products are delivered to their homes and unpacked.
Finally, to simplify appropriate lamp replacement, the FDA is considering the development of a biological efficacy rating scale for UV lamps intended for use in sunlamp products. Lamp technology continues to evolve, affecting the levels of UV exposure, the spectral characteristics and, therefore, the biological efficacy of ultraviolet lamp radiation. Presently, a label that specifies the type of lamps suitable for replacement in the product is required on sunlamp products and in the user instructions. As new lamps and new lamp manufacturers enter the marketplace, it is increasingly cumbersome to keep track of individual lamp designations that are compatible with the product and compliant with the standard. In order to simplify the process, especially for industry and state regulators, the FDA is considering a uniform grading/ rating system.
Comments to the ANPRM were received in July 1999 and have been under review since then. In September 1999, W. Howard Cyr, Ph.D., director of the Center of Devices and Radiation Health, updated the Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standards Committee (TEPRSSC) on the status of the ANPRM and the CDRH’s recommendations based on the comments received by the deadline. Dr. Cyr noted that all of the comments had not yet been evaluated, and his office was still in the process of reviewing additional comments.
Representatives of the indoor tanning industry, including LOOKING FIT®, traveled to the Baltimore area to be present at the TEPRSSC meeting.
The biggest news for the indoor tanning industry came in this statement from Dr. Cyr: “The FDA never had plans to ban sunlamps. That request was from the Academy [of dermatologists].” He strongly emphasized that since the melanoma-sunlamp connection is not well established and indoor tanning is a personal choice with fairly well understood risks, there are no current plans to ban sunlamps.
It is important to note that although this non-aggressive position by the CDHR is extremely positive for the indoor tanning industry, it is only the first step in a long road to our final goal.
Since then several meetings have occurred to discuss possible amendments. The most recent meeting was held in October 2003 where TEPRSSC called for rule changes associated with indoor tanning, the FDA last year was given the green light to develop amendments to the U.S. performance standard for sunlamp products. Current rules that are being considered for change include revised warning labels, addition of warning labels to all indoor tanning purchasing information, modification of the definition of eyewear, more stringent limits on eyewear effectiveness, adoption of maximum timer setting of 3 MEDs, and implementation of coding systems for sunlamps.
Before final acceptance of any changes, FDA must submit a proposal for final acceptance. The public comment period has not yet been established. The next TEPRSSC meeting was scheduled for Oct. 4, 2006, but was canceled. The next meeting has not been rescheduled.
|
Email this article
Add a comment
Printer version
Order reprints
RSS Feed
Bookmark article