I think that rating might be based on RJ45 contacts. From: Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 12:33 PM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing
My personal preference would be not to exceed .75A per pair because that matches the official cat5 ratings. On Nov 14, 2016 8:03 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: And, even though you will exceed published ratings, you can go to 1.5 amps per port without saturating the cores of the transformer. It will get hot, but not hot enough to unsolder itself. From: Forrest Christian (List Account) Sent: Monday, November 14, 2016 12:00 PM To: af Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Packetflux & 450M Timing The current products should power the 450M just fine. The rating is 1A per pair per port, so at the 48V you're good up to 96W. On Nov 14, 2016 7:50 PM, "George Skorup" <[email protected]> wrote: The 450m pulls 70 watts. The current SyncInjector/PowerInjector+Sync is around 1A max per port. What you could do for now is a GigE-POE-APC and the new aux port version SyncBox Junior. On 11/14/2016 12:34 PM, Matt wrote: Shouldn't the sync over power for the 450M be the same as PMP450i? How is the 1u sync injector coming? On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Forrest Christian (List Account) <[email protected]> wrote: All of the currently shipping syncbox product line are compatible. For sync over power, I have the specs, but the design isn't done yet. On Nov 14, 2016 5:40 PM, "Sam Lambie" <[email protected]> wrote: A question for Forrest mostly. Have you come up with a timing product for the 450m AP yet? If not, have you got a timeline for release? Sam -- -- Sam Lambie Taosnet Wireless Tech. 575-758-7598 Office www.Taosnet.com
