So Chuck, what is your opinion then? Looking at your site there is only about a $10 delta between the DC only and POE if I was looking at the right ones. Can you make an product to clamp faster without data on the lines or am I just imaging that? My thought was you could design it closer to 48 volts but most equipment draws a lot more than that on startup anyway.
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:21 AM <[email protected]> wrote: > MOV is slow and bad for data but power > SAD is fast but not robust > Gas tube is robust > > I use all 3 on my power surge arrestor products. > > *From:* Lewis Bergman > *Sent:* Wednesday, May 10, 2017 9:12 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Suppression Question > When I made the decision to the extent possible, eliminate CAT5 powered > devices and go all fiber and 48VDC I based it on two things. > I found MOV/SAD combination devices for about $15 to protect the DC line > compared to about ~$65 at the time for CAT5. Not only that, I found those > devices speced faster clamp times. I assume since they did not have to > worry about the voltage differentials of the data pairs. Chuck could > obviously answer that one. This was a long time ago so I can't say what > current pricing would be. I also found after converting to that that we had > less, not zero, but less issues with the fiber plus DC with protection > setup than the same equipment fed CAT5 POE with surge. > > We used all DIN mounted stuff. > > On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:02 AM Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > >> *nods* I was hoping for a more sciencey and bean countery answer. ;-) >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >> >> >> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >> ------------------------------ >> *From: *[email protected] >> *To: *[email protected] >> *Sent: *Wednesday, May 10, 2017 9:58:40 AM >> *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] Suppression Question >> >> >> Any exposed conductor will have a voltage induced on it by lightning >> strikes. Less conductors, less problems. I would think fiber and power >> would be more robust than ethernet. >> >> *From:* Mike Hammett >> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 10, 2017 8:56 AM >> *To:* [email protected] >> *Subject:* [AFMUG] Suppression Question >> >> This question is intended for Chuck and Forest, but I'll accept answers >> from anyone else qualified. >> >> I assume that the costs and complexities of doing surge suppression on a >> basic 48v DC power cable are much lower than doing so on a cat6 cable, >> trying to preserve GigE or above. Could you confirm that and perhaps back >> it up with costs, commentary, etc.? >> >> My point is to show that DC+ fiber not only is better for the data ports >> on both sides, but also for the tower equipment in general by being able to >> do more effective and less expensive surge suppression on raw DC than >> Ethernet. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> >> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> >> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> >> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> >> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> >> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> >> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> >> >> >> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> >> >
