By project, from survey to handover
Survey and quote free of charge, execution by our own crews with no subcontracting, testing and documentation delivered together with the work. From Modena and Emilia-Romagna, project by project nationwide.
Services · Support on tender specifications and compliance
“Compliant” is not a requirement.
Reaction-to-fire classes written in full, fibre subcategory, allowed losses and test thresholds: requirements a supplier cannot reinterpret, and offers read before the award.
The line costs one word. The mistake costs a refit.
“Flame-retardant cable, compliant” is still the most common line in building installation specifications. Since 1 July 2017 it identifies nothing: Regulation (EU) 305/2011 and the harmonised standard EN 50575 require CE marking and a Declaration of Performance, with seven reaction-to-fire classes and the subclasses for smoke, droplets and acidity. A class written properly reads in full — Cca-s1b,d1,a1 — and “halogen-free” is not a class: an LSZH cable may be certified only Eca-s3,d2,a3.
The same holds for the rest of the specification. “G.657 fibre” without the subcategory puts an A1 and a B3 on the same footing, while at the same 10 mm radius they declare 0.75 dB and 0.03 dB of macrobend loss at 1550 nm. “Splitter compliant with applicable standards” does not say whether the allowed value is 13.3 or 17.5 dB. “OTDR testing” without pulse width and launch cords is not a verifiable requirement. The result is offers that cannot be compared and deviations that surface at testing, when correcting them costs far more.
Services
How a number replaces an adjective.
01
Start from the intended use.
Risers, escape routes, crowded rooms, secondary runs, data rooms: the reaction-to-fire class is differentiated by function, not applied uniformly across the whole network. The first discussion — a 30-minute video call with a technician — is free of charge.
02
Every requirement with its full designation.
The CPR class in full, the fibre subcategory (G.652.D, G.657 A1, A2, B2, B3), splitter losses from clause 6.6 of ITU-T G.671, test methods and thresholds to ITU-T G.650.3, installation and cabling to the EN 50174 and EN 50173 series.
03
The offers received get read.
Where a “typical” loss is not a guaranteed value, where the Declaration of Performance is missing, where pass/fail thresholds are wider than the requirement. We list the deviations: assessment and award stay with you.
04
The check goes back on site.
At testing we verify by sampling that the designation printed on the sheath matches specification and DoP, and that measurements were taken with the prescribed parameters. Every deviation is agreed in writing.
An example, step by step.
Illustrative case, not a real client. A contracting authority puts the recabling of three public buildings out to tender: 9,000 metres of cable, risers and escape routes included. Across sixty pages the specification devotes one line to cables: “flame-retardant cable, compliant”. Four offers arrive, all declared compliant, with price gaps that over 9,000 metres weigh as much as a project line item.
-
Look at what was actually offered
The four Declarations of Performance say different things: two Cca-s1b,d1,a1 cables, one Dca-s2,d2,a2 and one merely Eca-s3,d2,a3 sold as “halogen-free”. All four satisfy the line in the specification, because that line asked for nothing.
-
The class differentiated by function
The specification is rewritten by intended use: B2ca or Cca on risers and escape routes, Eca allowed only on secondary runs. It adds that classes Aca to Cca sit under assessment system 1+, with a notified body, while Dca and Eca sit under system 3.
-
The lines that were missing
The fibre subcategory instead of the bare designation, allowed losses as numbers, and testing to ITU-T G.650.3 with pulse width and launch cords declared. Every requirement becomes a measurement, not an adjective.
-
The offers become comparable
With the requirements rewritten, the four offers go onto the same grid: two remain valid, one needs supplementing, one falls short on the risers. The deviations are listed; the assessment and the award stay with the contracting authority.
-
The check closes on site
At testing we verify by sampling that the designation printed on the sheath matches the DoP and the specification: compliance is demonstrated on the installed cable, not on the offer.
In this example the review adds two pages of requirements written as numbers and makes the four offers comparable item by item: the estimate is 3-5 days of technical work, against the cost of replacing the cable in a riser when the wrong class surfaces at testing or at a fire-safety inspection. Specification, offers and tender documents stay inside the client’s perimeter — on-premise or on a dedicated cloud in Italy.
An illustrative example on a typical case: the assumptions are recalibrated on your own data.
What you are left with.
- A specification with requirements expressed as measurable values and standards cited by number and edition.
- Reaction-to-fire classes differentiated by intended use and written in full, with smoke, droplets and acidity.
- A comparison grid for the offers, with ambiguous statements brought back into the open item by item.
- A list of the deviations found before testing, while correcting them is still cheap.
- Sample checks on site between specification, Declaration of Performance and the material actually installed.
Who has this problem.
- Contracting authorities and public bodies putting networks, cabling and data rooms out to tender.
- Technical departments that must compare offers all declared compliant.
- System integrators answering a specification written by someone else who need to know what they are committing to.
- Anyone who has taken delivery of works and must check, before accepting them, that they match what was required.
Two ways of working.
On call 24/7 for faults and restorations
The damage located by OTDR before any digging, splicing in the field in agreed windows including nights, the link re-certified before service is restored.
In both cases measurements, native traces and as-built records stay yours: on-premise in your own environment or on a dedicated cloud in Italy, in directly staffed data centres.
Frequently asked questions
The questions we are asked most often.
-
Which CPR class should I write into the spec for the risers of a public building?
The class is written in full, with smoke, droplets and acidity: for example Cca-s1b,d1,a1. On risers, crowded rooms and escape routes the usual choices are B2ca or Cca, while Eca stays acceptable only on secondary runs, subject to the fire-safety rules applicable to the building. Classes Aca to Cca sit under assessment system 1+, with a notified body; Dca and Eca sit under system 3.
-
Is writing “G.657 fibre” enough, or must I state the subcategory?
The subcategory has to be stated. At the same 10 mm radius a G.657.A1 declares up to 0.75 dB of macrobend loss at 1550 nm, an A2 up to 0.1 dB and a B3 up to 0.03 dB. In racks, in dense patching and in the last metres inside a building you require B3 or at least A2; on backbones, where the radius is not a problem, G.652.D or G.657.A1 remain the cheaper choice.
-
How do I make offers comparable when they declare “typical” losses with no guaranteed values?
You replace the adjective with the number: maximum loss per splice and per connector pair, splitter thresholds from clause 6.6 of ITU-T G.671, the full CPR class, the fibre subcategory. Then the offers go onto the same grid item by item and the deviations are listed in writing. Assessment and award stay with the client.
-
Which standards should I cite for testing in a public tender, and with which thresholds?
Testing of installed links is cited to ITU-T G.650.3, with bidirectional measurement at two wavelengths and launch and tail cords declared by length; installation and cabling follow the EN 50174 and EN 50173 series. The pass/fail threshold must be written together with the pulse width it is measured with: a 0.1 dB splice at 1 µs and the same splice at 30 ns are not the same statement.
-
Is the offer we received actually compliant with the specification? Who checks it on our behalf?
We read the offers received and point out where the Declaration of Performance is missing, where a “typical” loss is not a guaranteed value, where pass/fail thresholds are wider than the requirement. The deviations are listed item by item. The decision and the award stay with you.
Other services
Optical-fibre splicing OTDR certification and testing ODN/PON design and optical budget As-built documentation, labelling and network records
The first step
A site survey. Then the numbers.
Tell us the environment and the need; we tell you times, methods and costs. Before we start, not after.
30 minutes video call or site survey €150 free July promotion
Request an intervention We reply within one business day. Survey and quote are free.