Fiber optics

Cabling-Design.com FREE cabling and networking Helpdesk
icon
 Question by Samuel Maddox posted 22 Jul 2002
 Fiber optics
What is the most efficient way to run a 12-pair multi-mode fiber cable between two buildings?

Also,

What is the most efficient way to run a 200-pair cable between two buildings (about 300 feet)?
icon
 Answer by Dmitri Abaimov posted 24 Jul 2002
Dear Samuel,

I think efficiency always depends on the local conditions. If there is a conduit line between the buildings, it will be obviously most efficient to utilize it. If there is no such luxury, you can evaluate aerial or direct buried methods of which both have pros and contras. If efficiency means speed of installation in your case, aerial will be more efficient way to go unless you have to plant additional pole. Availability of direct buried cable path also depends on the actual site plan.

Today, when indoor/outdoor fiber optic cables became commodity on the market, it’s definitely more efficient in terms of speed, money and performance to go with indoor/outdoor cable as oppose to using a traditional OSP fiber optic cable and then transition it to indoor type once it enters the building.

So, there are plenty of factors affecting actual efficiency. Besides, efficiency itself has to be defined in terms of installation time, budget, future growth and other parameters.

Sincerely,
Dmitri Abaimov, RCDD

Click here to see the expert's profile
Back to the current page of questions | Back to all the questions
Back to Cabling-Design.com HELPDESK | Ask your question
Residential Cabling Guide

Home Cabling Guide

Finally, an instantly downloadable book that saves you thousands in home improvement dollars! Enjoy living in 21st century technology-advanced home while increasing its selling value and competitive advantage on the real estate market. Whether your cabling is for home office or high-tech leisure, you can wire your home yourself or learn "wirish" to speak with your cabling contractors in their language!

Learn more ...

Please rate this page

Rating: Average rating: Ratings
BadFineGoodVery GoodExcellent