Há vários anos, você executa projetos de cabos compatíveis com o padrão Power over Ethernet (PoE) para diversos dispositivos como telefones VoIP e câmeras de segurança. So far, up to 30 Watts is all you’ve been requested to support, but with the plethora of devices now able to take advantage of higher levels of PoE—like the latest 802.11ac Wi-Fi access points, digital displays and even desktop computers—your customers are starting to ask for four-pair PoE.
Crônicas sobre cabeamento
Like the TIA and ISO, Fluke Networks promotes the use of the 1-cord method to set reference for fiber loss measurements. The 1-cord method is where a launch cord is attached to a light source and the other end to a power meter. A reference is then set (the power measured is defined as 0 dB). Next, the launch cord is disconnected from the power meter, but not the light source. Then the far end of the launch cord is attached to the cabling under test and a receive cord between the far end of the cabling under test and the power meter.
Our industry commonly uses the term “RJ45” to refer to the modular 8-position, 8-contact (8P8C) interface deployed for Ethernet over copper twisted-pair network cabling despite it pretty much being a case of mistaken identity.
But since the RJ45 name has stuck, we thought maybe we’d take a closer look at the history of this nomenclature and why to this day, it remains the de facto interface for twisted-pair Ethernet applications.
Jacks of All Trades
Just like those who drive around long after the engine service indicator lights up on the dashboard, there are folks out there who have likely been putting off getting their tester calibrated despite the email or LinkWare™ Live notification from Fluke Networks.
You might remember that just about three years ago, the DTX CableAnalyzer™ was officially retired. Since its discontinuation, Fluke Networks has continued to offer technical support, repair and calibration for this tester that was once touted as the ultimate time saver and brought testing to a whole new level when it was introduced in 2004.
Adopted by TIA, the nomenclature for multimode fiber found in the ISO/IEC 11801 standard includes the prefix “OM.”
Rather than the spiritual mantra you hear in yoga class, most sources in our industry state that the acronym OM comes from “optical multimode” which seems rather obvious. But when it comes to the various nuances of each type of OM, the differences aren’t quite as obvious.
Let’s take a closer look.
So you’ve finished your fiber cable installation and are now on to the task of certifying the cable plant using an optical loss test set (OLTS) – it’s the tool you need for Tier 1 certification and the most accurate for measuring loss to ensure application support.
Unfortunately, you find some critical fiber links that far exceed your loss budget for the application. You now need to troubleshoot those links so you can fix the problems and move on to your next job. And the faster you can locate the problems, the faster you can fix them.
While it seems we can never hammer home enough the need to properly clean and inspect fiber end-faces since contamination remains the number one cause of fiber link failures, have you ever thought about what exactly you are cleaning and inspecting?
It’s always interesting at trade shows to learn what’s on the minds of end users, designers and technicians alike when it comes to testing. And this year’s BICSI Winter Conference was no different.
We’ve covered fiber insertion loss in plenty of past blogs, so by now we hope that you know it’s the amount of signal loss that occurs as the signal travels along a cable link. We also hope you know that insertion loss is directly related to the length of the cable—the longer the cable, the greater the loss—and that any connection point along the way (connectors, splices, splitters, etc.) also adds to the loss.