Pearson Technologies Site Map
Training
Technical Services
Benefits
Satisfied
Clients
Free Resources
Gallery
Training Products
Contact
Experience
Fiber
Optic Services And Products

HONEY, I SHRUNK THE WIRING CLOSET!
Or
THE MYSTERY OF THE DISAPPEARING WIRING CLOSET
Architects
and building engineers take note: your rules and mind set for the design of
future office buildings will change. Specifically, the size of and need
for wiring closets will be reduced. Eventually, wiring closets can
disappear! This reduction in size and importance is due to two trends,
which have been and, currently, are gaining importance and strength.
These two trends are: the increasingly frequent justification for fiber to the
desk (FTTD); and voice over IP (VoIP).
Fiber
to the desk is finding increased acceptance because of several factors, the
most important of which is reduced initial installed cost. This reduced
initial installed cost results from reduction or elimination of three sets of
costs.
The
first of these sets is the cost for construction. With commercial costs in the
range of $100-$200 per square foot, elimination of ten foot by fifteen foot
wiring closets in a ten story building saves $150,000 to $300,000.
The
second of these sets is the cost of network equipment in the closets. Such
equipment includes hubs, switches, enclosures and patch panels. This
equipment is replaced with ports in a centrally located distribution facility.
This relocation results in at least two cost reductions: reduced cost/port
through increased port utilization and reduced network maintenance costs, Since
this equipment is not completely eliminated, but relocated, it is difficult to
quantify the size of this cost reduction.
The
third of these sets is the support costs, which is the cost of equipment
required to support the network equipment in the closets. These support costs
include the costs for racks, cable trays, surge suppression, dry fire
suppression and dedicated environmental control. The largest of these
costs tends to be the cost for dedicated environmental control.
When
containing substantial electronics, closets must have dedicated temperature
control. This control compensates for two common conditions. The
first condition is the need for reverse control during the cool season.
In cool seasons, electronics in wiring closets need cooling while the rest of the
building needs heating. The second condition results from energy conservation:
many commercial office buildings have no, or minimal, the environmental control
during weekends. The cost of dedicated control can be $5000-$20,000 per
closet[1],
or $50,000 to $200,000 for a ten story building with one closet per
floor. When these three sets of costs are reduced or eliminated, it is
possible to achieve total saving of $500,000 for a ten-story building with one
closet per floor. Recently, a BICSI RCDD justified use of fiber to the
desk even though the fiber switch blades were nearly three times the cost of
UTP switch blades.
The
old argument against fiber to the desk has been increased cost of the fiber
electronics. (Note that the cable and connectors have been at cost parity
with UTP costs for several years.) While this argument has some validity,
it ignores the most important cost, which is total installed cost. When
the support costs of wiring closets are eliminated, the fiber electronics can
be more expensive than UTP electronics and still allow for a total initial
installed cost that is less than that of the horizontal UTP/vertical fiber
design. Believe it or not, fiber becomes cheaper than UTP!
Recent
work by Pearson Technologies Incorporated and the Fiber Optic LAN subcommittee
of the EIA demonstrates this new reality. This work has resulted in a
cost model and spreadsheets that demonstrate reduced initial installed cost in
certain scenarios for both new builds and retrofits.
When
the fiber to the desk design is used, there is no need for wiring closet space
for electronics and supporting hardware. In the model, the connections
between horizontal and vertical riser fibers are by mechanical splices, which
can easily be housed in a wall-mounted enclosure. Such an enclosure is
smaller and less expensive than rack mounted enclosures, which include integral
patch panels and volume for fiber service loops. Because of this reduced
size, such wall mounted enclosures can be mounted anywhere in office space and
do not need a closet for their use!
Fiber
to the desk network designs result in a reduction in the space required in
closets. Closet size and cost can shrink. In fact, the cost model
assumes only a 50 % reduction in the size and cost of the wiring closets. With
this reduction, a number of the fiber to the desk scenarios offer initial
installed costs that are lower than those for the horizontal UTP, vertical
fiber network design.
The
wiring closets are still required for telephone connections. However,
when VoIP is integrated into the network, such connections are already provided
by the fiber to the desk design. Then, wiring closets become
unnecessary. With this elimination of wiring closets, the cost model
supports fiber to the desk more strongly than at the present.
In
addition to changes in wiring closets, architects and building designers will
respond to changing requirements elsewhere in the building. With
increased fiber counts in the vertical riser, architects will need to increase
conduit sizes. With increased number of connections and electronic ports in the
central distribution facility (CDF) for network services, architects will need
to increase the CDF size. This facility, in the basement or at another
central location, will require increasing space to accommodate the ports which
were in the separate wiring closets. The use of the small form factor
connectors and their electronics will reduce this increase in space to less
than one for one.
In
conclusion, fiber to the desk is not a technology justifiable in the
future. It is a technology justifiable now. Architects, building
engineers and network planners need to reexamine their network design decisions
to ensure that initial installed cost and life cycle cost analyses support
their decisions to implement anything other than FTTD!
Respectfully submitted for your consideration,
![]()
Eric
R. Pearson, CPC, CFOS
President
Pearson
Technologies Inc.
Pearson Technologies Web Sites
http://www.ptnowire.com
http://www.FTTDnow.info
http://www.fiberopticlawsuits.info
http://www.sfoi.info
Contact
Pearson Technologies Inc.
© Pearson Technologies
Inc.