Page 60 - rise 2017

The test data of UV Fluorescent Lamp and UV LEDs as alternative for exposure system
Exposure
Type of Voltage Current Power
Method Time KWH Total Cost/Use
PCB used rating (watt)

660 × 0.0278 0.0183
Single 220V 3A 660W 100 sec/ /1000 × 0.38 =
UV sided 0.0278h = 0.0183 KWH RM0.006954
Fluorescent Double 1320W 1320 × 0.0556 0.0734
Lamp 200 sec/
sided 220V 3A (2 time /1000 × 0.38 =
process) 0.0556h = 0.0734 KWH RM0.02789
220 × 0.0208 0.004576
Single 220V 1A 220W 75 sec/ /1000 × 0.38 =
sided 0.0208h = 0.004576KWH
UV LEDs RM 0.001739
Double 440W 150sec/ 440 × 0.0417 0.01835
sided 220V 1A (2 time 0.0417h /1000 × 0.38 =
process) =0.01835 KWH RM 0.006973

Table III shows the performance of the commercialize UV Fluorescent Lamp and UV LEDs as
alternative for exposure system. Based from the collected data after performing the test, it shows that
using UV LEDs as the light source is far more efficient than using UV Fluorescent Lamp. LEDs were
efficient in terms of cost and power consumption. In addition, the use of the UV LEDs helps the
design to control the lights to be lit up to expose the optimal dimension of the PCB.

Project Return on Investment – ROI
Table IV shows the total price comparisons between UV Fluorescent Lamp and LED UV exposure
systems. The results show UV LED exposure 2 times cheaper than UV Fluorescent Lamp. Apart from
low cost data it also shows UV LED savings up to 67% over conventional Fluorescent UV lamps.

Table IV
Total price and electricity cost for UV Fluorescent Lamp and UV LEDs
Electricity cost for
Method Total price PCB Types Total
500 time use
UV
Fluorescent RM3000 Single sided RM3.477 RM3003.477
UV LEDs RM1000 Single sided RM0.8695 RM1000.8695
Saving Cost RM2002.6075 (67%)
UV RM3000 Double sided RM13.945 RM3013.945
Fluorescent
UV LEDs RM1000 Double sided RM 3.4865 RM1003.4865
Saving Cost RM2010.4585 (67%)

Return on Investment (ROI) = ((Project financial gain – projects cost) / projects cost)
= (2002.6075/1000.8695)
= 2 times

Pre-test Exposure Time