As you mentioned, the connector housing are less than waterproof. Having said that, we cut off the provided screw terminal and use watertight crimp connectors that solder the butt splice when heat is applied to shrink and seal them. Since we made that modification we had no issues and new deployments were made that way ever since.
I preferred using non POE surge arrestors since it seems they can be designed to clamp faster since there is no (or not much) voltage fluctuation on the line. We had a combination SAD/MOV to try and take advantage of the quick rise time of the SAD and the higher voltage capacity of the MOV. I am sure Chuck will inform us why this wouldn't work but we did it anyway. I would rather have had a Chuck solution but to m knowledge there wasn't and isn't one. At any rate, I liked separating the protection from the data and we used a 14 AWG pair to deliver it with the lightening protection only on the bottom. The protectors had latched remote monitoring output we could monitor but I am pretty sure that it wasn't 100% reliable. I remember one case specifically where the surge arrestor did its job and blew but the indicator didn't trip. Luckily we had more on the truck. On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Daniel White <[email protected]> wrote: > The attached drawing is an internal one, but since the radio is native PoE > it is not polarity agnostic. > > Regarding the gland, we have used these in various forms since 2009 and > never had issues with water ingress unless they are not mounted vertically. > > But I would recommend running shielded CAT5e and using it for out of band > management. Then if the fiber cable gets cut, you can switch to in-band > management. > > *************************************************************************** > Daniel White - Managing Director > SAF North America LLC > Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590 > [email protected] > Skype: danieldwhite > Social: LinkedIn > > *************************************************************************** > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Bill Prince > > Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 12:10 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SAF POE/Fiber question > > > > Some of the SAF units are polarity agnostic, but I'm not sure which ones. > > > > Daniel? > > > > bp > > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > > > On 5/26/2015 10:59 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > > One thing, I think this P/N might be for -48V polarity only. Does SAF > > > use -48 or +48? > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > http://www.avast.com >
