Talk:Fiber-optic cable

Untitled

The table Connector Boot / Meaning / Comment in the section "Patch cords" should be moved to Wiki page "Optical fiber connector" 80.254.148.43 (talk) 16:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

redirect

Below is discussion from Color coding of optical fibers, now merged in to this article. The Photon 16:51, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

prod

IT IS TO STATE THAT A NOTICE OF PROPOSED DELETION HAS BEEN ISSUED AGAINST THIS TOPIC. IN THIS CONTEXT I WOULD LIKE TO REFER TO YOU THE PAGE " TIA/EIA-568-B " IN WHICH COLOUR CODING OF ETHERNET CABLES IN CLERLY GIVEN. WENCE I WOULD REQUEST YOU NOT TO DELLETE THIS TOPIC FOR WIKI !!!!!

REGARDS PINKBASU

I have deprodded it, you could have deprodded it yourself. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 21:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

THANK YOU FOR RETAINING THE ARTICLE !!!!!!

REGARDS

PINKBASU —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkbasu (talk • contribs) 16:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Please do not use all capital letters. It is considered bad etiquette. You might want to read the WP:PROD policy page on proposals for deletion. 132.205.99.122 (talk) 21:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Color-coding

Ethernet color-coding for RJ45 connectors has nothing to do with fiber optic cabling. The strands have color-coded buffer tubing (or a buffer coating) in the following order: Blue, Orange, Green, Brown, Slate, White, Red, Black, Yellow, Violet, Rose, and Aqua. WorldOfMe (talk) 21:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are suggesting. The article already has that list of colors.--Srleffler (talk) 01:16, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hydronium contamination of glass fiber?

I'm adding a request for citation on

A critical concern in cabling is to protect the fiber from contamination by water, because its component hydrogen (hydronium) and hydroxyl ions can diffuse into the fiber, reducing the fiber's strength and increasing the optical attenuation.

In all my years of work installing fiber optic cabling I have never heard of such a thing. The only danger of water to optical fiber that I ever heard of was that of freezing water, where formation of ice crystals in the cable can break the fiber. In non-freezing environments (such as tropical installations), water blocking in the cable is therefore a non-issue.

I have not found any other citation on the internet for such a claim, except the echo chamber of other sites duplicating this WP article or text thereof. Alan (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't water have an absorbtion peak at around 850nm? That's why manufacturers take so much trouble to keep water away from fibre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.0.119.118 (talk) 14:52, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Of course this is bull! You do not want water to come in contact with the fiber not because of some mysterious diffusion crap, but simply because glass-air critical angle is much larger than glass-water. As soon as water comes in contact with the glass, critical angle drops and the fiber starts to "leak" light. Dry the fiber, and it's fine (provided there is no contaminants left behind, all so common in water). Water has index of refraction of 1.33, air is 1.0. For more info, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_internal_reflection —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.55.199.131 (talk) 17:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

missing content

This article has some technical information on how cables are constructed. However, it's completely missing a lot of other topics that ought to be in a general-intrest encyclopedia article. There is nothing on:

1. what they're actually used for (analog image transmission as in medical applications, digital signal transmission, ...)
2. the physics of how the cables work (total internal reflection,...)
3. the history of their use (were they first used for analog telephony?)
4. why you'd use coax cable or fiber-optic for a particular application

Ah, I see, we have both Optical fiber cable and Fiber-optic communication. I think they should be merged. --207.233.88.250 (talk) 16:53, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I think merging the two would be silly. There is more than enough content for two articles, and the subjects are distinct. The details of how the cables are constructed don't belong in the more general article on fiber-optic communications, and not all fiber optic cables are used for telecomm.

The physics of how optical fibers work is at optical fiber.--Srleffler (talk) 04:55, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

bend loss and damage

For typical 62.5/125 multimode patch cables, what is a minimum bend radius to avoid attenuation and cable damage? Sharp bends would cause permanent cable damage. Is there an in-between bend radius that would cause temporary attenuation, but avoid substantial permanent cable damage after straightening? If a typical patch cable is wrapped around a one-inch diameter cylinder, what is the typical amount of attenuation per wrap? Where can one find formulas, charts, tables and plots of such data?-96.237.15.180 (talk) 16:14, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Try looking at some optical cable manufacturer's websites. They ought to have datasheets that define minimum bend radii, etc. They might also provide some of the other information you are looking for.

This isn't really the right place for questions like this. Article talk pages are for discussion related to improving the article. Try asking at the Science reference desk.--Srleffler (talk) 04:34, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

History ??

Does anyone know of a page recording the history of optical fibre? Charlie Kao at STL labs in Harlow, Essex, UK, won (half of) the Nobel Prize for Physics for his trail blazing work in 1960-66 - should that not be here? Does anyone know what was done in the USA or elsewhere? Bell labs comes to mind, but I have no details.

AndyB (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

You want the article Optical fiber.--Srleffler (talk) 04:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Splicing and branching

As a practical matter, how are cable breaks repaired? It seems they can also be branched in T-shaped intersections. How does that work, especially for undersea cables? -- Beland (talk) 23:42, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

• Fusion splicing
• Fiber optic coupler
• Submarine communications cable#Cable repair

--Srleffler (talk) 03:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge with All-dielectric self-supporting cable

I'm mildly opposed to the proposed merge from All-dielectric self-supporting cable. The latter is a new article, and it's not clear to me that it is less viable. We have stub articles on other types of telecomm cable, which are linked from this article. There may be enough to say about them to merit keeping them as separate articles rather than trying to merge them all here.--Srleffler (talk) 03:44, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose for now: I believe that the source article may still in the course of development (being less than a day or two old is a bit of a clue). Any merge should be postponed until the article is mature enough that it can be properly judged whether it stands up on its own - or not. 86.159.159.194 (talk) 10:58, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Jacket material table

The table mentions Polyethylene as having poor UV resistance, but then the remark is "Good for outdoor applications". What?

50.68.13.81 (talk) 01:45, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

I removed the table and integrated what I believe was useful information the "Jacket material" section. The sources cited for each of the materials were supplier catalog listings that did not contain references for their own tables, so I don't believe anything of value was lost. Illini407 ^talk 18:53, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 6 August 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved (non-admin closure) ~SS49~ {talk} 16:57, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

---

Optical fiber cable → Fiber-optic cable – It's clearly the WP:COMMONNAME per Google ngrams. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:12, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Wouldn’t it make more sense to change the main Optical fiber article first?--64.229.166.98 (talk) 16:30, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

No. "Optical fiber" is correct. A cable that contains optical fiber can be referred to either as an "optical fiber cable" or as a "fiber-optic cable". I don't object to moving the article, but I will insist on the hyphen. (WP:Hyphen)--Srleffler (talk) 17:18, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm fine with adding the hyphen, as it's more grammatically correct and WP:CONSISTENT with the article at Fiber-optic communication. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Support for move to Fiber-optic cable. Object to moving optical fiber. --Zac67 (talk) 18:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

• Support per nom. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:41, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Support move to Fiber-optic cable.--Srleffler (talk) 03:38, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Support move to Fiber-optic cable.--GodeNehler (talk) 20:39, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Support as proposed Red Slash 02:14, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Similar communication without the cable

@Kvng: I have to disagree with you here. I removed Free-space optical communication from See also as not relevant. You restored it with the edit comment "Similar communication without the cable". If this article were fiber-optic communication I would agree with you, but it is not. This article is about the cable. FSO is not relevant to this article. Srleffler (talk) 04:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

As you will. We disagree. It's very small potatoes so no further discussion is needed. Happy editing! ~Kvng (talk) 04:11, 12 August 2024 (UTC)