# This is better than glow powder/paint...



## tempman (Mar 13, 2008)

I requested an information packet from the company that makes ALL of the luminova for most high end watches. Here are some pictures of some samples they gave me. I also epoxyed some small pieces in the bezel of my novatac. I can see my novatac easily through all hours of the night. 

Here are some pictures of the stuff I got.

http://s249.photobucket.com/albums/gg239/tempman84/


----------



## JimmyM (Mar 13, 2008)

So where can you get this stuff. Powdered Luminova might be great in epoxy.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Mar 13, 2008)

Yeah, I sent him a PM about it. Googles gives this source as the only USA distributor.

http://www.umccorp.com/luminova2.htm

This is the site on his images which is in Switzerland:

http://rctritec.com/index.php?id=8

So not sure if our new "TempMan" user is Euro, or how hard this is to get. FYI, I put a call into above USA link and asked for samples, and will update....but they do not do any direct online orders.


----------



## JimmyM (Mar 13, 2008)

LuxLuthor said:


> Yeah, I sent him a PM about it. Googles gives this source as the only USA distributor.
> 
> http://www.umccorp.com/luminova2.htm
> 
> ...


I also found this supplier
http://www.readysetglo.com/Oil_based_Glowpowder.asp
It listes the same kind of description "10 times as bright" and seems like they dance around the chemical composition " alkaline earth aluminate activated by rare earth ions". The japanese site that makes the Luminova (www.nemoto.co.jp) lists the composition as Sr4Al14O25:Eu,Dy


----------



## IsaacHayes (Mar 13, 2008)

You've just discovered strontium based glow powder. There is more to be discovered.  check out www.glowinc.com and take a look around. Their powders use the same technology and are 1st rate! Very bright!!!


----------



## LuxLuthor (Mar 13, 2008)

The guy from UMC made it known when I described disappointment with other brands, (& listed their names at his request--and that have been promoted at CPF), that these "web based companies" are bringing in cheap, illegal **& Imagine This** "Chinese Clone Imitation Versions." **Gasp, Gasp** 

He noted what I saw as their having poor quality and inconsistency from sample to sample...which was the result of over-hyped promotion here at CPF of one particular brand. When UMC finds companies infringing on the Japanese maker's patent, they are suing those companies, and he wrote down the names I gave him to double check their lists.

I'll let you know what he sends me for samples, and how that compares with the 3 brands (& numerous samples from one of those) that I have...which were supposedly ultra-bright.


----------



## Rothrandir (Mar 13, 2008)

I haven't kept up, which are the cheap crappy brands?


----------



## LuxLuthor (Mar 13, 2008)

Rothrandir said:


> I haven't kept up, which are the cheap crappy brands?



I purposely didn't mention any names, and didn't think it would be consistent with forum policy/intent....but I'll see how this company's sample compares.


----------



## Stillphoto (Mar 13, 2008)

It would outwardly appear that it's Glowinc that he's speaking about...but that's just what I take from this.

I contacted UMC for some samples. Fingers crossed.


----------



## LuxLuthor (Mar 18, 2008)

I got the sample from UMC today. It was a 2 oz bag in a white jar. First thing I noticed is that it is by far the smallest particle size. It looks and feels like it has as fine of a texture as any powder I have ever seen. It compares to powdered sugar or very well ground flour. You can get some idea by how it "dusts" the inside of the bag in photos. 

Although it leaves a residue somewhat like the most recent of the other company's 3 samples, the UMC is clearly much finer/smaller particle which you can tell by pushing into bag. Also if I rub/roll the outside plastic sides with powders in between my fingers, the three to the right all have a clear feeling of gritty granularity. The UMC has no granular/gritty feel sliding between your fingers.

I don't have a good way to precisely measure the relative brightness, but I'm guessing this would be denser in the same amount of liquid/epoxy. This powder has a whiter color which you can see in photos.

When I flash all 4 packets in same light, the largest particle size on far right looks the brightest in terms of immediate green brilliance...but I'm not sure that is a valid of a way to evaluate them on their practical use when mixed in liquid. That older version (far right) is not promoted as bright as the 3rd from right _(their more recent batch version)._


----------



## moeman (Mar 24, 2008)

any updates?


----------



## JimmyM (Mar 24, 2008)

LuxLuthor said:


> Although it leaves a residue somewhat like the most recent of the other company's 3 samples, the UMC is clearly much finer/smaller particle which you can tell by pushing into bag. Also if I rub/roll the outside plastic sides with powders in between my fingers, the three to the right all have a clear feeling of gritty granularity. The UMC has no granular/gritty feel sliding between your fingers.
> 
> I don't have a good way to precisely measure the relative brightness, but I'm guessing this would be denser in the same amount of liquid/epoxy.


Actually the particle size(assuming it's a relatively uniform) doesn't have an affect on density. A large box of 2" diameter balls has the same density as a box of 1/8" diameter balls. There are more 1/8" balls, but density is unaffected. However, you can increase density by mixing large diameter balls AND small diameter balls. I don't remember the exact mathematical relationship, but if you take 4 1" diameter balls and arrange them in a tetrahedron, the space in the center allows for a smaller ball of a diameter of some ratio to the 4 primary balls. So, to get maximum density, mix gritty powder with fine powder.
Of course there are self shadowing effects as well as the amount of light radiated versus the surface area to volume relationship.
Lux, mix up a batch and take some readings.


----------

