FTTP Feasibility Study Task 1 Report. The City of Fort Collins

Transcription

1 FTTP Feasibility Study Task 1 Report for The City of Fort Collins August 2016 Uptown Services, LLC Neil Shaw and Dave Stockton, Principals

2 Reference architecture Asset inventory and analysis Innovative design and construction approaches Sample designs & capital budget 2

3 Gigabit Passive Optical Network vs. Active Ethernet

4 Gigabit Passive Optical Network (GPON) ITU G.984.x standard Pure Ethernet services 2.4G downstream / 1.2G upstream Single fiber delivery to subscriber optical network terminal (ONT) GPON ONT s support ActiveE connections where needed Comprehensive bandwidth management standards Passive system with up to 128 splits and 35 km reach Active Ethernet (IEEE 802.x) Point to point GigE Single fiber delivery to subscriber ONT Dedicated symmetrical 1G to serving switch port - up to 60 km reach Majority of FTTP deployments have been GPON 4

5 Current bandwidth utilization Uptown 1Gig client seeing 1.0Mbps peak utilization per subscriber In GPON 50%, utilization is 10-15% of 2.4Gbps available Industry data ranges between 1-2Mbps peak per subscriber Consumption tied to subscriber behavior not their provisioned bandwidth on fiber (high breakage on 1Gig service) When will GPON 2.4G run out of gas? Calix Networks estimates GPON saturation between 2022 and 2024 Bandwidth headroom impacted by IPTV delivery on FTTP system Challenges for system design Cater to all levels of the broadband user continuum Build a network that will never be obsolete Time the technology lifecycle correctly Create the right economics for the enterprise to succeed over time 5

6 GPON Low Cost and Flexible 2.5G of shared downstream bandwidth Flexible splitter placement and less demand for fiber strands High port density 5,210 subs in one chassis (10 rack units) Consumes less space in rack and 33% as much power required Supports path to 10G GPON Active Ethernet Futureproof Dedicated GigE from serving switch to each subscriber One strand from subscriber to serving switch location Better suited for high capacity transport services than GPON Longer reach 60 km Extreme fiber strand counts required without active field cabinets Requires more fiber, space, power, cabinets, electronics and capital Tradeoffs can be quantified 6

7 Network Electronics GPON cards and ports = $50 per subscriber AE cards and ports = $320 per subscriber AE is $5.4M more than GPON at 20,000 subscribers Outside Plant Materials GPON splitters = $15 more per passing AE fibers per cable 2x-3x more = $1,600,000 over 600 miles AE is $700,000 more than GPON at 60,000 passings Technical Services GPON splitters require four splices / eight passings = $20 per passing AE requires four splices / passing = $160 per passing AE is $8.4M more than GPON over 60,000 passings AE will also require more and larger cabinets around the City 7

8 Evolving FTTP Standards

9 ITU GPON Standards Evolution XG-PON1 (G.987) 10G Down / 2.5G Up XG-PON1 available for four years Operators waiting for symmetrical 10G (NG-PON2) NG-PON2 (G.989) 10G Down / 10G Up Commercial deployments for NG-PON2 starting in 2016 IEEE Ethernet Standards Evolution Point to Point GigE (802.3ah) 1G symmetrical 10G EPON (802.3av) 10G symmetrical Commercially available in

10 Full Service Area Network (FSAN) NG-PON2 Four time and wave division multiplexing (TWDM) channels Up to four 10G PONs combine for 40G aggregate capacity Will operate over legacy splitters Higher split ratios and longer reach included in the standard Will accommodate point to point overlay WDM technology used to deliver line rates of 1, 2.5 and 10G over separate wavelengths Will occupy 1603nm 1625nm channels Full coexistence with other services Full 4x10G capability not expected until 2017 XGS-PON - 10G/10G interim option to be available in 2016 XGS-PON standard expected to be ratified in early 2016 Eventual capability of 8x10G PONs 10

11 Deploy GPON as the ruling architecture Design approach for mass market service areas Implement robust design standards in terms of network capacity Centralized versus distributed split? Deployed splitter capacity? Deploy hybrid architecture as needed for hi-cap services Design for dedicated fiber to equipment sites for active Ethernet Less cookie cutter than GPON network One-off designs to reflect specific market conditions Monitor GPON product lifecycle Determine final GPON platform strategy based on bid results Design system that will easily accommodate upgrades Plan for upgrades based on service mix (linear video?) 11

12 Reference Architecture Building Blocks

13 Provider Owned Premises Equipment Optical Network Terminal indoor wall mount or desktop versions Optional router capability (wireless or not) Set Top Boxes required for all TV sets receiving digital video services Customer Owned Premises Equipment Router may not be GigE capable All end user computing devices Standard telephones for telephone service Inside Wire Phone services use the existing phone wiring Digital video services use new CAT6 wiring or Wi-Fi Data services delivered over new CAT6 cable or Wi-Fi 13

14 Service Drop and Test Access Point One fiber drop cable installed from drop terminal to premises Fiber drop pushed or pulled in shallow drop conduit Drop fiber terminated in test access point (TAP) mounted on dwelling TAP provides demarcation between outside and inside fiber (bulkhead) Drops installed after subscriber orders service Network Terminal Network terminals connect drops to the FTTP outside plant network One network terminal serves between four and sixteen passings Drops have traditionally been spliced at the terminal location Connectorized systems allow for plug and play installs no splicing Network terminals are connected to the distribution system Network terminal strategy is crucial 14

15 Distribution fiber Distribution fiber connects network terminals to the feeder network Feeder network connections can occur at a splice closure or cabinet Distribution cables can range in size from 1 to 144 fibers The size and type of cable is driven by the splitting approach Centralized split approach 1x32 splitters aggregated in splitter cabinets Dedicated fiber strands from network terminals to cabinets Each cabinet typically fed with 12 feeder fibers One cabinet for every 250 homes on average Distributed split approach 1x4 and 1x8 splitters deployed in network terminals 1x4 and 1x8 splitters also deployed upstream in closure or cabinet Approach reduces fiber and splicing in distribution network by 87.5% One cabinet can support up to 1,500 homes with distributed split 15

16 Optical Line Terminals (OLTs) An OLT combines all digital content onto PON ports Each 20 card chassis supports up to 5,120 GPON subscribers Requires environmentally controlled space and 10 Rack Units OLTs connect upstream via multiple 10G uplinks Feeder Network Feeder connects splitter cabinets to serving OLTs Typically one feeder fiber per 32 passings (PON port) 1,875 feeder fibers would be required to service 60,000 passings Multiple equipment sites reduces the number of fibers per site Typical feeder cable is 144 fiber with multiple OLT sites 16

17 Backbone Network Layer 2 Backbone connects equipment sites to the core network routers OLTs can connect to each other using protected 10G rings (ERPS) Backbone uses much less fiber capacity than feeder 12 to 24 fibers Core Network Layer 3 Core network safely routes traffic to and from the outside world Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) routers connect to the Internet BGP routers deployed in pairs Installed on backbone network in physically diverse locations Each router connects to at least two Internet backbone providers Outside World Content Two physically diverse Internet backbone connections desired Video content would come in over one or both Internet connections Phone would also route over one or both Internet connections 17

18 Asset Inventory and Analysis

19 Fiber Network Characteristics 144 fiber cable routed throughout the City in conduit 112 fibers in use / 32 fibers available Network Users City Departments Traffic, IT, Utilities (electric and water) Third party governmental entities CSU, Larimer County, Schools Private sector dark fiber leases Level 3, FRII, i-cubed, Yipes Fiber capacity is limited 32 fibers are likely not available throughout the network City should reserve at least one spare buffer tube for maintenance Capacity could be characterized as scarce Applicability to Future Broadband Efforts Backbone could be used to connect network hub sites Feeder not sufficient capacity to provide capacity beyond hub sites 19

20 Backbone Capacity Building Blocks 10 Gig using two fibers & 10 Gig using one fiber 40 Gig using two fibers & 100 Gig using two fibers Nx10 Gig using two fibers and wave division multiplexing (WDM) 10 Gig Transport Technology Standard 10 Gig transport is preferred when fiber is abundant One to Two fibers per 10 Gig should suffice for early FTTP demand FTTP would eventually outstrip fiber strand availability on PRPA ring(s) 40 Gig and 100 Gig Optics 40 Gig is available on some platforms, 100 Gig is less prevalent in FTTP Both options are very expensive and introduce risk to network Wave Division Multiplexing Uses passive couplers to combine different wavelengths on one fiber Course and Dense options available for passing 2 to 40 waves WDM platforms offer great flexibility at each node at a cost $$$ Projected bandwidth demands will inform ultimate direction 20

21 Significant fiber conduit network in place GIS layers not made available for this stage of study Paper maps show pervasive deployment of 2 inch conduits Most pathways have two conduits including one spare for future use Applicability to future broadband effort Additional microducts can be blown in with existing fiber cable Spare conduits would support multiple fibers and/or microducts Reduces the feeder network construction requirements Limits costly hard surface construction and new railroad crossings Not appropriate for distribution network Implications of joint use with Electric Utility Electric staff desires to route around structures with energized facilities Would require creating of path around manholes (in the street) Would avoid safety issues with non-qualified personnel Would limit fiber damage in the case of fires or explosions in manholes Budget will need to reflect additional cost to create alternate paths 21

22 Substations Substation buildings are not equipped to house telecom systems Most substations have space for a new telecom hut ( 8 x 12 ) Fiber conduits would need to be routed into new huts Existing fiber network and equipment Existing City network does not appear to be useful for FTTP IT department would prefer to be a customer of the new network CSU manages the Ft. Collins network No overlap beyond the use of fibers for backbone systems Tropos Wireless Network System currently used for meter reading only not Wi-Fi Sized for collection of meter reading data 10 routers per square mile Consumer broadband would require 5x-7x routers (> $5M) Tropos 7320 routers do not support ac (limited to n) Expanding Tropos system for broadband = expensive distraction 22

23 Innovative Design and Construction Approaches

24 Maintain long term quality and reliability Overarching Lower subscriber dissatisfaction and higher retention Lower operating expense Leverage existing infrastructure wherever possible Lower capital expenditures Minimize new crossings in problem areas Highways and Railroads Minimize new hard surface construction / disruption Simplify network and subscriber installation requirements Lower capital expenditures More efficient installation process Minimize cost for high volume items Significant capital reductions Offsets that would allow for additional capital spending in other areas Minimize impact to landscape Lower capital expenditures Lower subscriber dissatisfaction 24

25 Backbone Use existing strands in PRPA fiber to create high capacity backbone Interconnect all OLT sites Connect City FTTP to outside world No need to overbuild existing fiber backbone for this purpose Feeder PRPA fiber not suitable for feeder network Existing conduits are ideal pathways for new feeder network Should work for majority of conduit mileage Distribution - Hard Surface Areas Existing conduits may provide pathway in hard surface areas Would require over pulling of microducts Would reduce, but not eliminate hard surface construction 25

26 Connectorization Cable type Terminal type Centralized Split Distributed Split Fiber Cable, Terminals and Cabinets Network Architecture Construction Techniques Underground Path Creation Boring Trenching Conduit Type Structure Size What is optimal mix of these elements from cost, operations and quality perspectives? 26

27 The promise of microtrenching according to YouTube System based approach to hard surface installation of conduits Equipment cuts, vacuums, installs and restores in one pass Narrow cut 8-10 inches deep Realities Road resurfacing and gutter repairs typically go deeper than 8 inches Hand holes still need to be placed out of the roadway Cost is much higher than boring ($ $30.00 per foot) Public works engineers prefer 18 inch minimum depth 18 inch depth is difficult to maintain with a very narrow trench Recommendations Do not assume microtrenching will play a major role for FTTP Include approach in the construction bid specification Include as an option for hard surface areas depending on availability Continue to monitor improvements (e.g. depth and restoration options) 27

28 Spliceless Install Required Small Drop Flower Pots Connectorized Splitters Microduct Pathways Distributed Split Small Terminal Structure Drop Terminal & Preterminated Cable 28

29 Benefits 99% of installs would not require any fusion splicing Significantly reduces the cost of equipment (splicer $5,000) Simplify installation process Improve testing and troubleshooting Reduced operating expense (in house and contract labor) Complications Cost to provide connection ports at drop closure location Cost to preterminate and stock different length drop cables Drop terminal size and impact on housing structure Added loss of connector compared to fusion splice What s at stake 23,400 + installs with contractor savings of $10 - $30 per splice splicers at $5,000 - $7,000 each Additional drop fiber cost of $0.16 per foot 29

30 Standard Approach Network Access Point (NAP) Standard high count fiber cable is accessed at each NAP location Closure is assembled, cable is prepped and assigned fibers are dressed Installer opens NAP, fusion splices drop and closes NAP Total materials and labor for 8 passings = $350 Terminal Approach #1 Standard high count fiber cable is accessed at each NAP location Closure is assembled, cable is prepped, assigned fibers are spliced to pigtails and plugged into drop port Installer accesses terminal and plugs drop into assigned port Total materials and labor for 8 passings = $650 Terminal Approach #2 Terminal comes equipped with splitter, input port and output ports Single fiber preterminated microcable is plugged into terminal input Preterminated drops are plugged into the terminal outputs Total materials and labor for 8 passings = $300 Minimum savings of $750K assuming 7,500 terminals 30

31 Standard Fiber Cable Fiber strand counts typically 288 or less for FTTP Deployed on large cable reels using motorized trailers Cable diameter ranges from 0.4 to 0.8 inches Microcable Fiber strand counts typically 144 or less for FTTP Deployed on large or medium cable reels Certain designs do not require heavy equipment to install Typically installed in microduct Preconnectorized Cables Microcables with factory terminated end(s) Connectors available for 1 fiber up to 24 fiber terminations Certain preterminated cables can be installed in microduct Installation Methods Pulling traditional approach Pushing requires special cable design Blowing very fast, requires specialized jetting device 31

32 Fiber cable bend radius Most traditional fiber cable coils will require a 17 x30 handhole Microcable coils will fit inside a 9 inch flower pot Closure / terminal dimensions Most traditional NAPs will require a 17 x30 handhole Certain terminals will fit inside a 9 inch round flower pot Conduit type and bend radius Larger HDPE rolled pipe is difficult to sweep up into a small structure Bend radius can sometimes exceed bore depth for 2 inch diameter pipe Microduct is more flexible for sweeping into handholes and flower pots Structure Material and Labor 17x30x18 Handhole - $84.25 Materials + $245 Labor = $ x24x15 Handhole - $51.75 Matertials + $150 Labor = $ Round x 18 Flower Pot - $17.23 Materials + $95 Labor = $ Minimum savings of $956,250 assuming 7,500 terminals 32

33 Sample Designs

34 100% GPON standards based system Relying on next generation standards to support future growth Nx10G capabilities over time Distributed split architecture Deploy 1x8 and 1x4 splitters in drop terminals Secondary terminal serves subscribers Primary terminals serve multiple secondary terminals Maintains 1x32 split ratio Splicing and cable sizes reduced by at least 75% Design assumes the use of micro-cable technology Microduct bundles for all distribution fiber Smaller footprint for terminal and drop hand hole locations No above ground structures July

35 100% GPON standards based system Relying on next generation standards to support future growth Nx10G capabilities over time Centralized split architecture One fiber per passing terminates in splitter cabinet Approximately one splitter cabinet per 250 passings Deploy 1x32 splitters as required in splitter cabinets Network Access Points (NAPs) connect subscriber drops to network All drops fusion spliced at serving NAP Design assumes the use of standard cable technology Single jacket loose tube fiber cable design throughout 1.5 IN HDPE conduits employed for drops and distribution pathways No above ground structures July

36 Mature approach with proven track record Uptown designed our first centralized split network in 2006 Fusion splicing is much less complicated Economics appear to be a wash for outside plant Less fiber and splicing for distributed split Lower cost terminals and conduits for centralized Centralized equipment costs are less Centralized splitters and PON ports added as subscribers are added Distributed splitters and PON ports installed up front for 75-90% of passings Installation process more complex with centralized All drops fusion splice at the time of the pre-install Requires closure re-entry for each drop install Test points limited to dwelling and splitter cabinet July

37 July

38 Design Metric Value Aerial Plant Miles 0.0 Underground Plant Miles 3.2 % Aerial 0% % UG 100% Passings 243 Passings per Mile of Plant 75 Materials Cost per Passing $140 Labor Cost per Passing $980 Total Cost per Passing $1,119 Total Materials (no drops) $33,917 Total Labor (no drops) $238,109 Total Cost $272,025 July 2016 * - Does not include engineering, fixed equipment, subscriber capital and installation costs. 38

39 Design Metric Value Aerial Plant Miles 0.0 Underground Plant Miles 2.5 % Aerial 0% % UG 100% Passings 243 Passings per Mile of Plant 96 Materials Cost per Passing $132 Labor Cost per Passing $781 Total Cost per Passing $912 Total Materials (no drops) $31,954 Total Labor (no drops) $189,761 Total Cost $221,715 July 2016 * - Does not include engineering, fixed equipment, subscriber capital and installation costs. 39

40 Design Metric Value Aerial Plant Miles 0.0 Underground Plant Miles 2.2 % Aerial 0% % UG 100% Passings 107 Passings per Mile of Plant 107 Materials Cost per Passing $126 Labor Cost per Passing $699 Total Cost per Passing $825 Total Materials (no drops) $29,538 Total Labor (no drops) $164,279 Total Cost $193,817 July 2016 * - Does not include engineering, fixed equipment, subscriber capital and installation costs. 40

41 Design Metric Value Aerial Plant Miles 0.0 Underground Plant Miles 0.6 % Aerial 0% % UG 100% Passings 81 Passings per Mile of Plant 143 Materials Cost per Passing $98 Labor Cost per Passing $530 Total Cost per Passing $628 Total Materials (no drops) $7,940 Total Labor (no drops) $42,185 Total Cost $50,905 July 2016 * - Does not include engineering, fixed equipment, subscriber capital and installation costs. 41

42 Design Metric Value Aerial Plant Miles 0.0 Underground Plant Miles 0.7 % Aerial 0% % UG 100% Passings 63 Passings per Mile of Plant 95 Materials Cost per Passing $128 Labor Cost per Passing $792 Total Cost per Passing $920 Total Materials (no drops) $8,058 Total Labor (no drops) $49,905 Total Cost $57,963 July 2016 * - Does not include engineering, fixed equipment, subscriber capital and installation costs. 42

43 Design Metric Value Aerial Plant Miles 0.0 Underground Plant Miles 2.6 % Aerial 0% % UG 100% Passings 174 Passings per Mile of Plant 66 Materials Cost per Passing $165 Labor Cost per Passing $1,097 Total Cost per Passing $1,262 Total Materials (no drops) $26,663 Total Labor (no drops) $190,926 Total Cost $219,589 July 2016 * - Does not include engineering, fixed equipment, subscriber capital and installation costs. 43

44 Design Metric Value Aerial Plant Miles 0.0 Underground Plant Miles 3.8 % Aerial 0% % UG 100% Passings 235 Passings per Mile of Plant 62 Materials Cost per Passing $170 Labor Cost per Passing $1,187 Total Cost per Passing $1,357 Total Materials (no drops) $39,833 Total Labor (no drops) $278,859 Total Cost $318,692 July 2016 * - Does not include engineering, fixed equipment, subscriber capital and installation costs. 44

45 Sample Design Area OH Miles UG Miles Passings Passings per Mile Weight Materials per Passing Labor per Passing Total per Passing Quail Hollow % $140 $980 $1,120 English Ranch % $132 $781 $913 Alta Vista % $128 $792 $920 Old Town % $126 $699 $825 Hearthfire % $165 $1,097 $1,262 Taft Canyon % $170 $1,187 $1,356 Willow Brook % $98 $530 $628 MDUs* % $73 $424 $497 Weighted Average / Total , % $116 $739 $855 Single family weightings based on parcels per zoning district Representative MDU and commercial sample designs not completed Willow Brook design area was not deemed to be representative MDU costs estimated to be 50% of average single family costs July 2016 * - MDU and commercial sample designs not completed. 45

46 Outside Plant Costs Weighted Average Per Passing Total Construction 72,435 Passings (NOTE: Does not include other system costs e.g. electronics and operations) Materials $116 $8,402,460 Labor $739 $53,529,465 Total $855 $61,931,925 15%* $128 $9,271,680 Total $984 $71,276,040 Key Construction Costs Directional boring in landscaped areas - $10.00 per foot Vault, hand hole and flower pot adder - $2.00 per foot Pulling fiber in conduit - $0.75 per sheath foot (average for all cables) Splicing - $30 per splice * - Contingency based on unknowns related to serving a large number of multi-tenant buildings July

47 $22.54, 2% $22.63, 3% $24.27, 3% $24.89, 3% $17.44, 2% $14.80, 2% $35.15, 4% $35.15, 4% $662.55, 77% UG Path Labor UG Path Materials Cabinet Labor Peds and Vaults Materials Fiber Cable Labor Cabinet Materials Enclosures Labor Fiber Cable Materials Enclosures Materials July

48 GPON standards based system will best serve the immediate and long term needs of the Fort Collins market Centralized split architecture is the best fit the technical and reliability requirements of the Fort Collins technical team Up to eight huts located in sub station yards could house equipment for the entire FTTP network Abundant conduit along major arterial routes significantly reduces the cost of the feeder network Total outside plant cost per passing of $984 is based on sample designs from large cross section of the City 100% underground environment drives outside plant costs higher than a typical FTTP deployment July