Make sure you are measuring the proper wavelengths, and that you look at both the transmit and return power values. You can fool yourself on loss by testing at one frequency and then looking at the different frequencies reported by the OLT/ONT.
Mark > On Sep 10, 2020, at 1:13 PM, ch...@wbmfg.com wrote: > > Sometimes. Yeah, that 844 reports it to 4 decimal places and it says > "-17.0000" > On my main cables I am pretty anal. I have 576 strands leaving the C.O. I > really want every splice perfect if I can get it now so when the day comes > that we actually use the strand there will be no issues. > > I am finding that the ribbon splices have much higher loss. The OTDR reports > them about 10X higher than that splicer. Have not got to the bottom of that > yet. > I did find about 4 dB of loss in the C.O. where a tech had bent a ribbon a > little tight. That was pretty remarkable. I just increased the radius a bit > and got that much back. > > -----Original Message----- From: fiber...@mail.com > Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 11:07 AM > To: af@af.afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] My solution > > So, Chuck, you are using a power meter to determine that fusion splices > reported as 0.02 dB are actually 0.1 dB? > > That's really impressive if you are measuring from CO to the subscriber. Not > only will your documentation have to be perfectly accurate correctly > reflecting each span length, the 2% slack inside the cable, each connector > characterized and each splitter port's non-uniformity measured. > > I think your 844G is reporting incorrect light levels if it is showing no > loss over a 8000' span. > > > Jared > >> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 >> From: ch...@wbmfg.com >> To: af@af.afmug.com >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] My solution >> >> I have equipment to do bidi, olts anything someone may want. >> Power meter is the only way to really know your span loss. >> >> With my better splicers we can see the quality of the cleave and the fiber >> itself. >> None of the splicers measure the loss anymore, they use some kind of graphic >> image algorithm. >> >> I like my splices to all be .02 or better. For example, my first customer >> RX optical level is 17 dBm this morning. Leaving the C.O. splitter it is >> 17.0 And they are 8000' away. Nice to see. Hard to believe. That is what >> the 844G is reporting. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: fiber...@mail.com >> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] My solution >> >> Re: fusion splice losses, is the first the loss reported by the fusion >> splicer and the latter a measured value? >> >> Do you measure with light source and power meter or bidirectional OTDR? One >> way OTDR shots are only an estimate and may report incorrect loss values for >> splices. >> >> Even at 0.1 dB fusion splicing is far superior than mechanical splices that >> average 0.2 dB - 0.75 dB. >> >> Jared >> >> >> > Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 >> > From: ch...@wbmfg.com >> > To: af@af.afmug.com >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] My solution >> > >> > I have found that the db loss on fusion splices to be wildly optimistic. >> > It >> > may say .02 dB but in reality be .1 >> > They just guess at it based on the look of the fiber. The old first >> > generation splicers actually injected a signal and read the splice loss. >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: fiber...@mail.com >> > Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 >> > To: af@af.afmug.com >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] My solution >> > >> > Just as an FYI, there are some nonexpensive fusion splicers out there. >> > >> > Chinese models (AI-8/AI-9) for under a grand on Amazon. Less on >> > eBay/Aliexpress. I got one. It works. There's apparently an add-on for >> > splice on connectors. >> > Smaller handheld models from Jilong (a grand) and Easysplicer (bit over > a >> > grand, V groove, Swedish manufacturer). Both support splice on > >> > connectors. >> > >> > FOA mini "review" on the Easysplicer: >> > https://www.thefoa.org/foanl-5-16.html >> > >> > Any of those should work for terminating drops. Personally I prefer > >> > fusion >> > splicing over mechanical splices. >> > >> > Jared >> > >> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2020 >> > > From: "Chuck McCown" <ch...@wbmfg.com> >> > > To: af@af.afmug.com >> > > Subject: [AFMUG] My solution >> > > >> > > I think I will switch to a mechanical. Too cumbersome to haul out an >> > > expensive fusion splicer. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Sent from my iPhone-- >> > > AF mailing list >> > > AF@af.afmug.com >> > > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > > >> > >> > -- >> > AF mailing list >> > AF@af.afmug.com >> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > >> > >> > -- >> > AF mailing list >> > AF@af.afmug.com >> > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> AF@af.afmug.com >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > -- > AF mailing list > AF@af.afmug.com > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com -- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
