Do mechanical splices have more reflectance?

On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 5:47 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:

> Well, I couldn't let it go.  It dawned on me this morning why -32dB
> optical return loss figure actually matters.  The OLT will get reflections
> from every output leg of every splitter.  Start adding all of that up and
> you can start to approach the specified limits of total optical return
> loss.
>
> The logarithmic scales aren't always intuitive.  One bad value can hurt
> really bad.  In this example, my one "Bad connector" with -40 reflectance
> has the impact of adding roughly 300 SC-APC connectors.
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Adam Moffett <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2025 5:34 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Help me Grok this - tolerance to reflected power
>
> I think I figured out the limits.....or a limit.
>
> ITU G.9807 is saying that the minimum optical return loss for
> 10Gig operation is 32dB.
> Return loss is the opposite of reflectance.  -65dB reflectance = 65dB
> return loss.  You sum the power of all the reflections to get the total
> optical return loss on the path.  A simple way is every time you double the
> number of connectors you get another 3dB of reflectance (better formulas
> exist of course).
>
> If I have 8 of those -65dB APC connectors then my total ORL (all else
> being perfect) is 56dB.  It would take a whole lot of good connectors to
> get you to 32dB ORL.  Or one really bad connector.  I suppose the twist-ons
> aren't a big problem as long as they're done decently.
>
> Technically Raleigh scattering also adds to the total ORL, but it's
> negligible compared to the connectors.
>
> -Adam
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* AF <[email protected]> on behalf of Mark Radabaugh <
> [email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2025 1:15 PM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Help me Grok this - tolerance to reflected power
>
> It’s not much of an issue on PON as far as I can tell.    If you are
> running RFOG (analog cable added to the fiber) I think it’s a much bigger
> issue.   I don’t know of very many companies still running RFOG.
>
> Mark
>
> On Aug 21, 2025, at 1:00 PM, Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I think the "tolerance to reflected power" was the wrong direction to
> look.  That seems like it's more about not damaging the equipment. I'll
> back out of the rabbit hole and just ask what I'm trying to figure out:
>
> How much does reflectance actually hurt you on PON?  Google results are
> vague.
>
> Example: You generally need to have two connectors at the OLT (device to
> patch panel), and there's one connector at the ONT.  If you fusion spliced
> everything else so there were no additional reflective events, would there
> be a measurable BER or stability difference compared to having a coupler in
> the NID, connectorized splitters in the field, etc.
>
> Another example: An AFL Fastconnect twist-on SC/APC field termination has
> -50dB reflectance according to the spec sheet.  A factory terminated
> connector or splice-on connector is -65dB.  How much does the twist-on hurt
> you?
>
>
> -Adam
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Adam Moffett <[email protected]>
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 21, 2025 11:54 AM
> *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> *Subject:* Help me Grok this - tolerance to reflected power
>
>
> Definition from ITU G.987:
> 3.3.15 tolerance to reflected power (transmitter): A transmitter parameter
> that characterizes the
> maximum admissible ratio of the average reflected optical transmit power
> incident at the transmitter
> to the average optical transmit power.
>
> If my average transmit power is +6dBm and the tolerance to reflected power
> is -15dB, then 6 - 15 = -9, so reflected power as strong as -9dBm won't
> harm the transmitter?
> Is it that easy or am I misunderstanding the definition?
>
> -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

Reply via email to