Searching for any details about UV lamps and "black lights" and tanning lights found this interesting snippet (link) from the amateur electronics community:
[Heavily edited for key points:]
On Fri, 18 May 2007 09:47:05 +1000, Bud Finley <>
wrote:
>Can anyone tell me if the 9W UV lamps sold as replacements for
>cosmetic nail driers are suitable for EPROM erasing.
...
Mercury vapor UV lamps come in two varieties;
long wave, 365 nm = nail drying
short wave, 254 nm = EPROM erasing or "germicidal";
you can usually smell some ozone near the lamp.
Short wave doesn't go through glass, need quartz bulb.
Short wave UV will harm your eyes if you look at the operating lamp for
very long; a minute or two is enough to give you an object lesson. (Even a reflection).
Also, https://uvhero.com/difference-uv-light-black-light/
UVA = 320–400 nanometers. UVA is the powerful tanning beam.
UVB = 290-320 nanometers. Contributes to tanning and photo aging.
UVC = 200-290 nanometers. Most hazardous.
"black light" = the longest part of UVA, and a little short-wave visible. Low intensity compared to sunlight, erasers, or sterilizers.
Tanning beds apparently use the longest part of the UVA band.
What is in sunlight: from the World Health Organization:
UV radiation reaching the Earth's surface is largely composed of UVA with a small UVB component.
Shorter wavelengths have higher energy photons, so there is probably a maximum wavelength that will cause the cure to happen.
Bottom line: I think there is an excellent chance a "germicidal" bulb would work, and a moderate chance a UV epoxy or nail-polish curing bulb would work.
DPS probably doesn't like that option because a) a lot of people would ignore the details and use the wrong type, b) getting complete coverage with a small bulb would be tricky, especially while c) ensuring adequate eye protection.
[Heavily edited for key points:]
On Fri, 18 May 2007 09:47:05 +1000, Bud Finley <>
wrote:
>Can anyone tell me if the 9W UV lamps sold as replacements for
>cosmetic nail driers are suitable for EPROM erasing.
...
Mercury vapor UV lamps come in two varieties;
long wave, 365 nm = nail drying
short wave, 254 nm = EPROM erasing or "germicidal";
you can usually smell some ozone near the lamp.
Short wave doesn't go through glass, need quartz bulb.
Short wave UV will harm your eyes if you look at the operating lamp for
very long; a minute or two is enough to give you an object lesson. (Even a reflection).
Also, https://uvhero.com/difference-uv-light-black-light/
UVA = 320–400 nanometers. UVA is the powerful tanning beam.
UVB = 290-320 nanometers. Contributes to tanning and photo aging.
UVC = 200-290 nanometers. Most hazardous.
"black light" = the longest part of UVA, and a little short-wave visible. Low intensity compared to sunlight, erasers, or sterilizers.
Tanning beds apparently use the longest part of the UVA band.
What is in sunlight: from the World Health Organization:
UV radiation reaching the Earth's surface is largely composed of UVA with a small UVB component.
Shorter wavelengths have higher energy photons, so there is probably a maximum wavelength that will cause the cure to happen.
Bottom line: I think there is an excellent chance a "germicidal" bulb would work, and a moderate chance a UV epoxy or nail-polish curing bulb would work.
DPS probably doesn't like that option because a) a lot of people would ignore the details and use the wrong type, b) getting complete coverage with a small bulb would be tricky, especially while c) ensuring adequate eye protection.