Over never heard that comment of loose tube being better for underground. Do you know the reasoning?
On Fri, Jan 4, 2019, 4:20 PM Adam Moffett <[email protected] wrote: > My only reason for sticking with the loose tube drop cable vs the 900um > tight buffer is that it's my understanding that loose tube is better for > underground. Maybe I should get past my prejudice against tight buffered > fiber. > -Adam > > > On 1/3/2019 8:56 PM, Chris Fabien wrote: > > My guys got good at using a AFL Fast Connect with a 3mm boot and getting > the distances right to just have the loose tube ending inside the boot. > Sometimes a piece of heatshrink over the end of the boot as well. The loose > tube is fairly rigid but it work OK in our fairly large NIDs . > > Now we are using tight buffer flat drop so it just has 900um right in the > cable. But we also switched to fusion splicing a pigtail at the NID so > don't use a field install connector any more either. > > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 3:43 PM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm kind of winging it because I haven't found an example to follow. Is >> there a better way to do this? >> >> That's the orange bare fiber inside 16" of clear 900um furcation tube. >> The connector is an SOC made for 900um cable. The furcation tube is >> pushed about 3/4" into the end of the buffer tube and then a piece of >> heat shrink ties the pieces of tubing together. >> >> It seems durable enough, but it's a lot of finicky pieces. Took about >> 10 solid minutes to do this. I'm sure with practice I can shave that >> down, but it just seems like there has to be an easier way. >> >> In a moment I'll send a pic of why I'm bothering..... >> >> -Adam >> >> -- >> AF mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >> > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
