I should correct myself that core/clad concentricity is .5um I believe not .4. (and physics) having said that the improvement has v groove alignment or profile system’s consistency rivaling that of the core system with present fiber manufacturing standards. You also have no option when splicing ribbon fiber.
When we first started analyzing the fusion systems back in 1988 the core/clad concentricity was over 1um the results were not very attractive same as in 1991(this test was also preformed on TITAN fiber not SMF28 with even more confusing results) & 93 the change was noticed in 96 when the core/clad concentricity was around .8um the average splice loss for v groove alignment systems was .04 with no splice over .1db (today we have 35%+ better specs) we tested over 600 splices completed by various manufactures of mass splice units including 3m’s mass mechanical splice system with similar results, the mechanical system had 2 splices that were .3 & .27db. (single fiber fusion systems are typically superior to mass systems) Fiber curl is one other flaw that can effect mass splicing which Corning guarantees to be better than 25um measured over 10 mil of fiber this spec was from 1998 not sure what it is today.
Yes HDCM, which was mentioned in the original post, is superior, never disputed. As for 100 times better you may be a little generous with that.
The last decision is the technician who will need to decide , visually, if the splice is expectable on either system even when the core or profile systems display a 0.00db “estimated” splice loss.
Re: Help no Formal Trainning Fiber Trace Analysis
There is 1 reply to this message
