FO directly buried or through duct

Charbel · Nov 11, 2015

Dear,

The application is that the PLC will be running a pump for distributing to a reservoir where level sensor/switches are included.

The level sensor/switches are monitored from a remote IO

I need to run Fiber optic cable for connecting the PLC to the Remote IO together separated by a distance of 1.5 km.

I have two options, either I run FO cable through a UPVC duct with using manholes, or put it directly buried (less cost).

Clearly FO cable running trough UPVC duct will be better option (easier to pull if needed) but higher cost due to manholes and UPVC duct.

for directly buried, FO should be armored.

I am not good at estimating cost, but I believe it would cost around 8000 dollars more.

thank you!

charbel

tragically1969 · Nov 11, 2015

Charbel said:
Dear,

The application is that the PLC will be running a pump for distributing to a reservoir where level sensor/switches are included.

The level sensor/switches are monitored from a remote IO

I need to run Fiber optic cable for connecting the PLC to the Remote IO together separated by a distance of 1.5 km.

I have two options, either I run FO cable through a UPVC duct with using manholes, or put it directly buried (less cost).

Clearly FO cable running trough UPVC duct will be better option (easier to pull if needed) but higher cost due to manholes and UPVC duct.

for directly buried, FO should be armored.

I am not good at estimating cost, but I believe it would cost around 8000 dollars more.

thank you!

charbel

What's your question ?

Only you know what your budget is or what will work best for the run, you could use armoured cable, just make sure you run at least 50% more cores than you need as the price difference between 8 and 16 cores is not much.

It also depends on what speed you need, you could use twisted pair and get Ethernet extenders to do the same job for less cabling cost.

shawn_75 · Nov 11, 2015

A good quality direct buried armored FO cable is just fine. Unless you forsee other services being pulled to the same site, skip the manholes. Also, as tragically1969 said, put in more strands than you need.

OkiePC · Nov 11, 2015

Is there some reason that a radio I/O system would not work better for this? How many I/O points are at this remote site?

Saffa · Nov 12, 2015

At 1.5km distance, unless there are severe obstructions, you could look at unlicensed 900Mhz FHSS radios (assuming these are legal in your country). Take a look at the J series radios from Schneider. I have an application where I poll remote IO using modbus TCP over a link like this and it works great. I only poll every 5 seconds but that's plenty fast enough for reservoir level measurement.

If free band stuff is no good then take a look at Schneider's Q series radios. You'll need a licence but generally the cost for that will be much less than for cabling.

There are plenty of other radio options too, as OkiePC says take a look at wireless IO. Elpro is very good, I use them often.

FO directly buried or through duct

Charbel

Member

tragically1969

Member

shawn_75

Member

OkiePC

Lifetime Supporting Member

Saffa

Member

Similar Topics