Talk:Optical fiber connector: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 13:26, 25 August 2010

Abbreviation expansions

Hi,

does anybody know where SC, LC, ST stands for? I'm lokking for that information and can't find it. thanks!

Richard

I'm sure they stand for something, but it's probably lost in the sands of time.--A. B. 22:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might take a look here.

Dustin 16:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about VF-45, I came across this in a translation I am doing of an Introduction to Ethernet, but found no mention of it here. It is some sort of fiberoptic connector... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.208.226.3 (talk) 14:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ST: Straight Tip

SC: Straight Connection

LC: Locking Connection

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.219.225.242 (talk • contribs) 02:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the first time I hear the above mentioned long forms. I familiar with the names mentioned in the articles table in the 2nd column named Long Form. Michilans (talk) 15:23, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Force Inc. link

I removed one of the links, Introduction to fiber connectors. It had some good material but it also appeared to be a front for Force Inc. --A. B. 22:47, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there something bad about Force Inc. specifically, or linking to commercial sites (pls excuse my ignorance)? This page doesn't seem biased or particularly commercial, just a few ads, and I've found the info on it pretty useful. I'd like to revert this change.... --gurnec 19 July 2006

See these Wikipedia pages:

Wikipedia:External links, especially the section "Links normally to be avoided"
Wikipedia:Spam, espcially the section "External link spamming"
Spamdexing -- much of Wikipedia's external spam-linking is not even done to lure Wikipedia readers -- it's just there to build search engnine rankings. Google "loves" links leaving Wikipedia and seems to weight them pretty highly when computing search rankings.

I may have been a bit hasty in deleting this one -- I'm constantly deleting spammy links from the fiber articles (case in point: see Talk:Timbercon and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timbercon).

One telling mark of a spammer is to go to Search web links and search for instances of the same domain name. Use a * for a wildcard (example: *.fiber-optics.info ) and see how many links you get back. In the case of the fiber-optics.info domain, just the one above. So, yes, I was probably quick on the trigger -- feel free to add it back in.

And please -- if you see spammy links getting added, revert them and put a warning notice on the spammer's talk page.--A. B. 23:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MIC is less-common? No way!

Where I work (University hospital of Leipzig, Germany) we have got MIC wall outlets/plugs all over the place. Most of the cables used are either MIC-ST or MIC-SC depending on the NIC and connection speed in use in the area, MT-RJ is used only for patching, but even there we got lots of MIC, SC and ST plugs/outlets. I propose MIC to be moved into the "common" section.

EDIT: After some research it dawned on me that MIC is in fact FDDI. In case there's no other type called MIC I suggest merging those two.91.66.216.247 (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FDDI defines way more than just the connector; it includes the optical media specifications, the data link protocols, ring management, etc. I'd say MIC should link to FDDI, and indeed, have done just that. I've also merged the two tables, because while I don't know what's common and what isn't, the claims to that effect in this article were completely unsourced. I suspect they arbitrary anyway, since the article never defined what "Common" was. Plus, I just don't see that distinction being useful to the reader in the first place. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 22:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TX/RX specification?

Is there a standard or practice for a consistent use or marking of transmit (TX) and receive (RX) ports on plugs or patch panels? I don't believe that the only solution is to try connecting it, and if doesn't work, switch it around. It isn't so easy, especially with the duplex connectors (LC, SC, MIC) and 4 port LC adapters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.38.110.188 (talk) 12:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usually TX is on the left side and RX on the right side, if you are standing in front of the plug and you look into the plugs. Hint: Check one of the SFP datasheets. I could poste a link to one of the SFP datasheets, but independent which company's SFP I would choose, wikipedia guys would complain that I chose one company. 80.254.148.43 (talk) 13:19, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

I undid some edits today, many of which related to references. In one case, a well-intentioned editor moved a bunch of general web references from the "references" section to the "external links" section. This was inappropriate. These web references are sources that were used in preparation of the article. They were identified as references by the editor(s) who used them, and should be treated as such. They should not be arbitrarily downgraded to "external links". Note that the footnoting feature on Wikipedia is relatively new. Older references were often listed in this manner.

I also undid the removal of some cites to an OZ Optics datasheet. Unlike external links, references may point to commercial sites and documents. Such sites and documents are often not "reliable sources", but can be used to document information about the company or its products (see WP:SELFPUB). In an article about a commercial product, such as fiber-optic connectors, the manufacturers of the product are often a good source of information, for obvious reasons.

I have no problem with someone removing the OZ references, if they first replace them with a better reference that provides the same information. Removing a usable reference and leaving the statement it supported uncited is not acceptable.--Srleffler (talk) 06:13, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Visual Identification

It is requested that a photograph of Fiber connectors and receptacles be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

If there is a way to visually tell the difference between fiber connections (SC, LC, ST...) by looking at the ends, it would be very helpful to add it to this wiki. I'm having a hell of a time trying to eyeball the difference between different connections. It also would be helpful to include (visual based) data such as:

XXXXX connectors are always mounted as (one, two) (vertical, horizontal) ports
the XXXXX connector has a notch (on top, on bottom)
simplex = one connector/cable, duplex=a pair connectors/cables
It would be helpful to have a picture of the end of a patch cable next to the connector type it fits into
it would be helpful to mention that connection caps are normally placed on the ends of fiber to protect them and need to be removed prior to use—Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.19.142.10 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 20 November 2009

Yes, one can visually distinguish different fiber connectors. The differences between the common connectors are pretty obvious. Do the photos not help? More photos would, of course, be useful.

FC connectors screw on and have a "key" for aligning the fiber rotation. SMA connectors screw on but don't have a key. ST connectors are similar to FC, but have a "bayonet" fitting rather than a screw thread, and the fiber tip is longer. LC and SC connectors are square; LC is smaller than SC.--Srleffler (talk) 04:46, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signal Degradation

Is insertion loss covered? it'd be helpful to briefly mention that pluging and unpluging fiber connectors results in insertion loss due to XXXXX; and that there is a definite lifespan to the number of times one can do this without serious signal degradation—Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.19.142.10 (talk • contribs) 14:45, 20 November 2009

APC clarification

The article reads, "Angle-polished connections are distinguished visibly by the use of a green strain relief boot, or a green connector body. The parts are typically identified by adding "/APC" (angled physical contact) to the name." So does APC actually mean Angle-Polished Connections or Angled Physical Contact and what is the significance of whatever part it refers to being angled? —MegaPedant 12:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

APC is "angled physical contact", as the article says. Note 2 below the table explains what is angled, and why.--Srleffler (talk) 19:54, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both the core and surrounding ferrule face are slightly angled. Illustrated on Slide 21 Connector End Finishes at http://www.thefoa.org/tech/ref/termination/Term/Term.htm : "The final solution for singlemode systems extremely sensitive to reflections, like CATV or high bitrate telco links, was to angle the end of the ferrule 8 degrees to create what we call an APC or angled PC connector. Then any reflected light is at an angle that is absorbed in the cladding of the fiber."-96.237.78.13 (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Connector details: dimensions, terms, adapters

Please add dimension information for the connectors, with mechanical drawings.

Are the terms "male" and "female" used? How are the mating parts designated/referred to?

Please mention couplers/adapters, with photos. Are adapters always cable-to-cable couplers, for different types of connectors? Or do they sometimes "adapt" a cable to plug into a receptacle? Do couplers introduce one or two optical junction losses?-96.237.78.13 (talk) 22:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanical drawings are going to be hard to get because we can't use copyrighted material on Wikipedia without a proper license. This means drawing have to be either made specially for Wikipedia, or someone with copyrights to existing drawings has to release them under a suitable license.

I don't think I have heard "male" and "female" used to refer to single-fiber connectors. Some of the multi-fiber connectors such as MTP/MPO do have male and female variants, distinguished by alignment pins vs. holes to receive them.

For common connectors such as FC, SC, LC, etc. the usual couplers are just a simple mating sleeve that allows a connector to be mated to each end. There is only one optical junction: the end of one fiber is butted directly against the end of the other. Receptacles on equipment are more variable. A receptacle can be a bulkhead-style mating sleeve to mate a fiber inside the equipment with one outside, or can hold the external fiber in close proximity to a detector, or can have optics to image the external fiber's end into an optical system inside the device.

A general-purpose adaptor to allow a fiber with one type of connector to be plugged directly into a receptacle for another seems unlikely. It's easier to just use a short length of fiber with the appropriate connector types on each end. I have seen some equipment that could be adapted to different connectors by exchanging a fitting.--Srleffler (talk) 04:34, 23 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Srleffler for all that useful info!

It seems like "receptacle" is the common term? A coupler might be said to have two receptacles? Would the complementary term be "plug" for what is at the end of a cable, that mates with the receptacle?

For dimension information, it would be very helpful to have side-view pics with a grid in the background, or even just a ruler. Or even just some scale markings added to side-view pics after the fact? Anything would help a novice identify an unknown connector. It is unfortunate that almost all WP pics lack dimension clues. Also, single group photos of the most common connector types together, a side view and an end view, would be very helpful in understanding relative sizes.

What are the best resources for learning about Fiber Optic test equipment? It seems quite specialized and expensive. Any do-it-yourself hacking resources for learning/experimenting with minimal expense?-96.237.78.13 (talk) 13:26, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]