160 likes | 246 Views
Cost optimisation of optical access networks. Peter Hale, Martin Davies Pirelli Cables, UK David Brittain University of Bristol, UK. Summary. Conventional cables or Blown Fibre? ‘Simple’ analysis Results Further work ‘Comprehensive’ analysis Genetic algorithms Results
E N D
Cost optimisation of opticalaccess networks Peter Hale, Martin Davies Pirelli Cables, UK David Brittain University of Bristol, UK
Summary • Conventional cables or Blown Fibre? • ‘Simple’ analysis • Results • Further work • ‘Comprehensive’ analysis • Genetic algorithms • Results • Conclusions and discussion
Conventional or Blown Fibre? • Optical fibre in the access network • Must be cost-effective • Alternative approaches • Conventional loose-tube? • Blown Fibre? • Generic approach to modelling • ‘Simple’ • ‘Comprehensive’
‘Simple’ analysis • Considers component costs • Methodology • Feeder network • Distribution network • Building blocks • Spines • Stars • Planning • Less simple with Blown Fibre
Results Spine Star
..0 1 1 0 0 1 Mother ..1 1 0 1 0 0 Father ..0 1 0 1 0 0 Sister ..1 1 1 0 0 1 Brother Genes ‘swapped’ from here ‘Comprehensive’ analysis • Genetic Algorithm (GA) approach • Based on biological evolution • Operators • Crossover • Mutation • Detailed costing approach
Basis of model • Outline of costing approach • Cable and plant • Installation costs • Net present value • Price erosion • Does not include • Disposal costs at end of life • Duct and sub-duct costs
Primary node Customer site Exchange St Possible secondary node site Primary node S Duct GA network map
Conventional cable Blown fibre GA solutions - 1
GA solutions - 2 Conventional cable Blown Fibre • Some nodes have same position • One additional node for conventional cable
Topology - differences and features • Cost differences • Generally conventional cable installed earlier • Blown Fibre installed just-in-time • Blown Fibre plant generally less expensive • Node placement • Additional conventional node • Deferred installation saves cost • ‘Cluster’ of customers around nodes
Conclusions and discussion • Blown Fibre more cost effective • Both models • Less labour • Blow through joints - no splice trays/splices • Less plant - only install required fibres • Just-in-time installation • Topology differences • Ability to defer costs