PLC splitter vs FBT splitter
The manufacturing process of PLC splitter and FBT splitter is very different. When making a choice between the two, you can start from the following perspectives.
|PLC Splitter||FBT Splitter|
|Working Wavelength||Between 1260nm~1650nm, wavelength is adjustable. Support the use of more application environments.||Only three wavelengths are supported: 850nm/1310nm/1550nm. Cannot work under other wavelengths.|
|Spectral Ratio||Up to 1:64. Only 1:2, 1:4, 1:8, 1:16, 1:32, 1:64 standard products are available. Provides higher reliability.||Support customization, for example, 1:3, 1:7 beam splitting ratio. The higher the value, the more unstable it is.|
|Spectral Uniformity||Beam splitting is uniform||Uniform splitting cannot be achieved, and the larger the splitting ratio, the worse the uniformity, which affects the transmission distance.|
|Failure Rate||The failure rate is much smaller than that of FBT optical splitter.||The larger the splitting ratio, the higher the error rate.|
|Process & Cost||Complex process, high chip cost||Heat shrinkable tubes and other materials have low cost and simple technology|
|Size||Compact structure, small size. It does not take up much space for installation.||Pull cone splitter is made of multiple 1×2 connection package, the higher the split ratio, the larger the volume|
Overall, compared to FBT, PLC optical splitters are superior in performance, smaller in size, more heat resistant, and resistant to extreme environments. It is more stable and suitable for long distance networks. But the cost of PLC is higher.
At high splitting ratios, PBT performance is unstable with large size, and PLC is more cost-effective. At low splitting ratios, there is little difference between FBT and PLC in terms of effect. The raw materials for FBT are only easily available quartz substrate, optical fibre, heat shrinkable tube, stainless steel tube and less adhesive. The development cost is just one-tenth or even one-hundredth of that of PLC.
In some cases when there are few taps or inconsistencies in the number of users and distances, the optical power of different lines needs to be distributed, and devices with different splitting ratios are needed, then FBT taps will be used.
While in the triple play (triple play transmission of optical signals have 1310nm, 1490nm, 1550nm and other wavelength signals) or FTTH and other scenarios that require multiple wavelengths of optical transmission and more users, PLC splitter is particularly suitable for this split scale applications.
Summary: PLC is more cost-effective for splitters requiring a split ratio of 1×16 or more. FBT splitters are more cost-effective when you need a split ratio below 1×4. 1×8 is the threshold. In general, FBT is more economical. If you require higher network performance, PLC optical splitters are recommended.
Selection of package type
Box optical splitters generally use 2mm or 3mm OD fiber optic cable. Box package taps are currently the most used type by operators, with compact ABS packages and more flexible applications. And stainless steel tube optical splitter generally uses 0.9mm OD fiber optic cable.
Bare fiber type PLC optical splitter leaves bare fiber at all its ends. It is mainly used on the occasion of infrequent disassembly, such as cable connector box, fiber optic distribution panel, etc.
A miniature optical splitter is a miniature steel tube package, which can be divided into with connector pigtail and without a connector pigtail. Connectors are usually available in SC, LC, FC and ST types. They can be installed in fiber optic splice boxes, modular boxes, and wiring closets.
Rackmount optical splitters can meet the requirements of data centres or server rooms for high cabling density. They are generally packaged in metal boxes, which are easy to install in fiber optic projects and provide good protection for splitter devices. Various adapter mounting interfaces such as SC, LC, FC or ST connectors are available. Rackmount optical splitters are widely used in FTTX projects, cable TV systems and data communication centers.