Optical Fiber Coloring Machine – Locate A Reliable Chinese Material Supplier For Optical Fiber Coloring Machines.

The electric utility industry is increasingly dependent on high-speed optical networks to support daily operations. For over two decades, utilities have used fiber optic media to support their own personal internal applications. In more the past several years, public power companies plus an occasional electric cooperative have ventured into FTTH cable production line for the main benefit of their clients along with the generation of additional revenue streams. Down the road, new construction and smart grid initiatives promise to grow fiber’s role even farther into electric utility operations. The final point is quite a statement considering fiber is definitely seen on transmission lines and distribution lines, in generating stations, as well as substations.

So, if it is a given that optical fiber is a reality in the electric utility industry, then it is important for individuals with responsibility for your control over utility assets to comprehend several of the basic categories of optical cable products and where those products best easily fit into the electric grid. Since the majority of the fiber employed by utilities is deployed from the outside-plant, probably the most common questions center around your selection of ribbon versus conventional loose tube cable designs and where one solution is much more economically viable than the other.

Outside plant cables, either aerial or underground, get even closer to the house.

Both ribbon cables and conventional loose tube cables are staples in the telecommunications industry and have been in existence for several years. Both products work well in harsh outdoor environments, and both are available in a variety of configurations, including: all-dielectric, armored, aerial self-supporting, etc. The chief distinction between these two product families will be the manner where the individual fibers themselves are packaged and managed inside the cable. A ribbon cable has got the individual fibers precisely bonded together inside a matrix which may encompass as few as four or approximately 24 fibers. Typically, however, these matrixes, or “ribbons” are bonded together in a small grouping of 12 and placed in the tube that holds multiple ribbons. As opposed, a loose tube cable design has between 2 to 24 individual fibers housed in multiple buffer tubes with every fiber detached from the other.

Practically anyone within the electric utility industry with any amount of being exposed to optical fiber products will be aware of the basic structure of loose tube cable. Ribbon cables, however, have enjoyed widespread adoption among regional and long-haul telephony providers but might always be unfamiliar to many inside the electric utility space. This unfamiliarity has a price since ribbon products can offer a four-fold edge on loose tube designs in lots of applications:

Ribbon cable could be prepped and spliced much more rapidly than loose tube cables. This advantage means less installation time, less installation labor cost, and significantly less emergency restoration time.

Ribbon cables enable a lesser footprint in splice closures and telecommunications room fiber management.

Ribbon cables offer greater packing density in higher fiber counts which enables more potent utilization of limited duct space.

Ribbon cables are normally very cost competitive in counts above 96 fibers.

The very first two advantages listed above are byproducts in the mass fusion splicing technology enabled by ribbon cable. A mass fusion splicer can splice all of the fibers in the ribbon matrix simultaneously. Thus, in case a 12 fiber ribbon is commonly used, those fibers could be spliced within 12 seconds with average splice losses of .05 dB. As opposed, the conventional loose tube cable requires each fiber to become spliced individually. So, through comparison, optical fiber ribbon machine requires 12 splices to become fully spliced while a 144 fiber count loose tube cable demands a full 144 splices. Along with the time savings, a decreased total number of splices also yields a reduction in the amount of space required for splicing. Hence, there is an associated reduction in the volume of space required to support splicing in closures and then in telecommunications room fiber management.

The reader with experience using ribbon cable might offer two objections at this moment. The initial objection is definitely the value of mass fusion splicing equipment, along with the second objection is definitely the painful and messy procedure of prepping large fiber count unitube ribbon cables. The 1st objection is definitely overcome by merely checking out the current prices of mass fusion splicers. In the last couple of years, the price difference between single-fiber and ribbon-fiber splicing equipment has decreased dramatically. The 2nd objection is overcome through the roll-out of all-dry optical cable products. Older ribbon cable products were painful to prep due to infamous “icky-pick” gel employed to provide water-blocking. The unitube form of many ribbon cable products translated into an excessive amount of gel and a general mess for that splicing technician. However, new technologies allow both conventional loose tube and ribbon products to meet stringent water-blocking standards without having gels whatsoever. This dramatically lessens the cable prep time when splicing for product families. However, the essential model of ribbon cables signifies that the benefits of all-dry technology yield a lot more substantial reductions in cable prep time.

Even for low fiber count applications, ribbon cables carry a significant advantage in splicing costs. The most effective point for conversion to ribbon cables typically occurs at 96 to 144 fibers according to the labor rates used for economic modeling. In that variety of fiber counts, any incremental cost distinction between ribbon and loose fiber configurations will likely be offset by savings in splicing costs and installation time. For fiber counts equal to and greater than 144, the carrier would want a compelling reason to never deploy ribbon cables given the reduced value of splicing and extremely comparable material costs.

Splicing costs vary tremendously in accordance with the local labor market. Typically, however, single-fiber fusion splicing expenses are anywhere between $23 and $35 per-splice over a national level for standard outside-plant cable. For cost comparison purposes, we shall split the real difference and imagine that we need to pay $28 per-splice when we sub-contract or outsource single-fiber splicing. If we outsource ribbon-fiber splicing, we are going to believe that each 12 fiber ribbon splice costs us $120. Ribbon-splicing costs also vary tremendously dependant upon the local labor market, although the $120 number is probably from the high-average range.

So, based upon those assumed splice costs, a regular loose-tube cable splice will definitely cost us $4,032.00 at the 144 fiber count (144 single fibers x $28 per-splice) whereas the comparable ribbon cable splicing costs will probably be $1,440.00 (twelve 12-fiber ribbons x $120 per-splice). This provides us an absolute savings of $2,592.00 in splicing costs each and every splice location. When the 144 fiber ribbon cable costs the same or under the comparable loose-tube cable, then the case for ribbon at that fiber count and higher will be the proverbial “no-brainer.” Every time a ribbon cable can be obtained that may perform the job within this scenario, there is very little reason to think about the alternative.

The situation for ribbon versus loose-tube optical cable is less compelling at lower fiber counts. By way of example, when utilizing those same per-splice costs in a 96 fiber count scenario, the ribbon cable saves us $1,728.00 each and every splice location. However, the financial benefit afforded with the splicing can be offset by higher cable price. Additionally, dexkpky80 quantity of splice locations may vary greatly from a application to the next. Within a typical utility application, however, 96 fiber configurations represent the stage where cable costs and splicing costs tend to break even when comparing ribbon to loose tube.

The economics of fiber counts notwithstanding, you will still find several places that either ribbon or loose-tube may be the preferred option. By way of example, it will take four splices to repair a 48 fiber count ribbon cable in comparison with 48 splices for the loose-tube equivalent. On certain critical circuits, therefore, it will be desirable to get SZ stranding line just because of the advantages in emergency restoration. Also, ribbon cable items are generally smaller which creates some space-saving advantages in conduit. On the flip side, some applications (fiber-to-the-home, as an example) require multiple cable access locations where we take out only two to eight fibers from a cable for splicing using mid-sheath access techniques. In those instances, ribbon may be viable with new “splittable” ribbon technologies, but might be less practical for a few carriers than conventional loose tube. However, the gel-free technology located in both ribbon and loose-tube is a huge labor savings feature in those circumstances. Aerial self-supporting cables (ADSS) still require the use of some gels, but any utility company installing fiber optic cable in almost any other application must be leaving the gel-remover back in the shop. “Icky-pick” in conventional ribbon and loose-tube cables is actually a relic in the 90’s and an accessory for labor hours which is often easily avoided.

To sum it, there exists not a single network design that suits all applications, and not an individual cable which fits all network designs. However, knowing the options and knowing where they can fit can significantly impact installation time, labor costs, and emergency restoration time. Each of the alternatives are field-proven and have been around for several years. Utilities can leverage the benefits of these different solutions by simply remembering precisely what is available, and applying just a little basic math to evaluate cable costs, splicing costs, and labor hours.

Comments (0) Trackbacks (0)

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Trackbacks are disabled.