WHITE PPlug and Play Splitter Architectures Drive Operational Savings... Since the use of connectors resulted in more loss than straight splicing, the network architects decided splici
Trang 1WHITE P
Plug and Play Splitter
Architectures Drive
Operational Savings
Trang 2After service providers decide to deploy a particular fiber-to-the-premise (FTTP) architecture, they are faced with a number of important decisions This paper addresses one such decision that will significantly impact the network in terms
of time, performance, flexibility, and cost throughout its operational life Providers must decide how to connect the F1 optical feeder cable inputs to the splitters in the fiber distribution hubs (FDHs) There are several methods for making these connections, but selecting the best technique will provide benefits in many other areas, such as turn-up speed, dealing with customer churn, and easier maintenance and troubleshooting
Early decisions to splice Many early FTTP deployments sparked concerns about loss budgets Since the use of connectors resulted in more loss than straight splicing, the network architects decided splicing inputs to the splitters was preferable to minimize loss The feeder cable was brought into the cabinet and prepped into a splice area New splitters were installed with fiber pigtails that were spliced into one of the F1 fibers This method resulted in slightly less loss and enabled the addition of more splitters as the network grew
However, there were also a few downsides to splicing the F1 cables to the splitters The first issue is the amount of time required to install each splitter Splicing obviously takes considerably longer than mating two connectors Also, splicing has an affect on the work force Each time a new splitter is added, it requires technicians with more training and higher skill sets as well as the need
to have all the specialized splicing equipment available Not having one or the other readily available increases the time it takes to perform the task and slows down the overall deployment
Another issue created by splicing is in the initial turn-up of the cabinet In order to test all the F1 fibers, the technician must splice pigtails for connecting each F1 input to the test equipment A considerable amount of time can be spent during initial turn-up with splicing on pigtails and cutting them off again following testing This could lead to testing through the splitter or not testing F1 inputs at all – neither of which is a recommended practice
Plug and Play
Splitter Architectures Drive
Operational Savings
Trang 3Plug and Play Splitter Architectures Drive Operational Savings
Page 3
Testing the splitter itself requires the technician to
splice a connector to the input of the splitter So, in
essence, to test both the F1 and the splitter would
require breaking a splice, splicing connectors to both
the F1 and the splitter, running the tests, cutting off the
connectors, and re-splicing the F1 to the splitter input
This process is both time consuming and costly
Benefits of connectors
Eventually, network technicians determined that there
are advantages to using a connectorized approach in
the FDH They decided to add a connector onto the
F1 cable that would easily connect it to the splitter
input Several factors attributed to the decision to
connectorize this process
First, as volumes have increased, connector quality has
improved significantly in the last few years The loss
attributed to a connection has dropped about
one-tenth of a dB Additionally, the splitters have further
reduced loss characteristics Typical loss for a splitter
was traditionally about 17 dB, but that has improved
to about 16.5 dB today Together, these improvements
have resulted in more budget for loss – and a good
place to use some of that is in adding a connector to
the splitter input
Adding a connector to the F1 provides more rapid
testing of the inputs It also helps achieve faster
installation of the splitters – ADC’s splitters can be
installed in less than five minutes It eliminates time
and expense involved in installing each splitter into the
FDH while providing one more area for segmenting the
network during troubleshooting procedures
Splitter choices
Once the network architect makes the choice for
connectorization, there are two splitter configurations
available – pigtail-and-play or plug-and-play Although
both offer substantial benefits over straight splicing, the
plug-and-play has additional advantages For example,
the F1 connection requires no routing when installing
the splitter This mitigates the risk of disturbing an
adjacent F1 connection when installing a new splitter
In the past, there was a potential for the technician
routing the F1 to accidentally disturb an adjacent F1,
which could cause a service interruption or outage for
32 customers In many cases, the F1 can be exposed
whenever a technician works on the cabinet This allows
a potential for accidental damage anytime a technician
is performing a task, such as connecting an F2 cable
But with a plug-and-play splitter design, the connection
is made between the F1 and the splitter simply by
plugging the splitter in the backplane of the cabinet
One argument for the pigtail-and-play splitter is its ability to provide more flexibility for routing business services through the cabinet Having a pigtail in place provides a separate patch panel for routing business services or expressing them through the cabinet Although this is a point well taken, it may be an even better idea to have those business services and their F1 connection segregated from the residential services Business services include several classes of service with different service level agreements associated with them – along with different revenue streams
Even in a plug-and-play scenario, there is typically
a completely separate pass-through panel used for expressing business services This method enables easy identification of a different service running on
a particular cable Finally, plug-and-play splitters also require less routing expertise than the pigtail-and-play version That equates to less training required
to perform service and maintenance at areas of the network that incorporate connectors versus splices The goal of any FTTP buildout is to achieve the right balance between up-front initial equipment costs and the operational costs involved in long-term performance
of the network Connectors are typically more expensive than a splice in terms of initial cost However, a
connectorized FDH cabinet is one point in the network where using connectors makes sense
With the improvements in the loss characteristics
of fiber-optic connectors and optical splitters, the operational cost advantages of connectorization far outweigh the initial cost savings of splicing These operational advantages – faster turn-up, easier test access, lower training requirements, less specialized equipment, and an overall more flexible network – are only achievable with a connectorized F1 input
Trang 4Website: www.adc.com
From North America, Call Toll Free: 1-800-366-3891 • Outside of North America: +1-952-938-8080 Fax: +1-952-917-3237 • For a listing of ADC’s global sales office locations, please refer to our website.
ADC Telecommunications, Inc., P.O Box 1101, Minneapolis, Minnesota USA 55440-1101 Specifications published here are current as of the date of publication of this document Because we are continuously improving our products, ADC reserves the right to change specifications without prior notice At any time, you may verify product specifications by contacting our headquarters office in Minneapolis ADC Telecommunications, Inc views its patent portfolio as an important corporate asset and vigorously enforces its patents Products or features contained herein may be covered by one or more U.S or foreign patents An Equal Opportunity Employer
105254AE 8/07 Original © 2007 ADC Telecommunications, Inc All Rights Reserved