It’s Time to Move Toward a Standardized Fault Managed Power Connector Interface

Fault managed power (FMP) is poised to change the way property owners power their buildings, networks, manufacturing plants, and other assets. Recognized in the National Electrical Code (NEC) since its 2023 edition as Class 4 power, FMP provides efficiencies in cost while delivering power at higher voltages and longer distances than Power over Ethernet (PoE). At Cabling Installation & Maintenance we have documented FMP as a technology and have attempted to provide technically based information that will allow potential users of FMP to consider fairly its potential fit for their (your) powering needs.

In this article I’m going to depart from a “just-the-facts” approach, and voice my opinion about FMP and its future. I believe it’s time for the members of the FMP ecosystem to move toward a single, standardized connector interface to which FMP cables can be terminated. I believe that doing so will tilt the scales toward adoption of FMP rather than away from its adoption. And I believe the scales should be tilted in that direction.

I’ll try to back up those opinions in the reverse order in which I stated them.

The scales should be tilted toward FMP adoption rather than away from it

Fault managed power is not some newly developed technology whose long-term viability is unknown. It was patented under the name Digital Electricity (DE) in 2011, and DE products have been sold commercially since 2014. United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clinical trials on newly developed drugs take less time. Despite its history of safe, successful deployment, FMP is new to many. Questions about the installation and handling of media for higher-voltage systems linger but are unfounded. To use a term common to the FDA, FMP’s safety and efficacy have been well-established. Any activities that nudge a potential user toward considering FMP, rather than away from considering it, are worthwhile.

Establishing a standardized connector interface for FMP will encourage adoption

For this, I rely on my observations of the cabling market’s historical consumption habits. Perhaps the most impactful and noteworthy example is the LC connector’s adoption by the fiber-optic user community. Ultimately, the consuming market decided the LC interface was the connector of choice for fiber-based local area networks. But what I remember vividly is that the decision to “let the market decide” came after a failed attempt on the part of the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) to standardize a small-form-factor (SFF) interface. I won’t rehash the details, but will point out it took a significant period of time for the market to choose the LC—during which several SFF interfaces fought the good capitalist fight for dominance and makers of network transceivers had to either wait-and-see which interface would prevail, or take the financial risk of choosing one or more interfaces to build into their hardware.

This market dynamic, which played out in the late 1990s and into the very early part of the 2000s, could be characterized as a nuisance associated with the adoption of fiber-optic technology in network environments, particularly including data centers. In important ways, it’s unlike the current situation with FMP. Fiber-optic networking’s proliferation was inevitable with the increasing transmission speeds that now reach hundreds of gigabits per second. Back then, principals involved in fiber-optic projects had to sort out and choose among multiple connector interfaces, which complicated and likely slowed down projects, but didn’t dissuade anyone from using fiber to meet their speed-and-distance needs. Today with FMP, its proliferation is not inevitable. FMP is a burgeoning solution and while its advantages and value proposition can be easily recognized, the technology still needs to win the hearts and minds of the consuming market as a whole—one user at a time, one project at a time. Uncertainty over the interface to which FMP cable will be terminated, is an obstacle the industry doesn’t need and one that isn’t necessary. Establishing a universal interface for FMP delivers a message to the industry as a whole that there is indeed a cohesive ecosystem of FMP technology providers, populated by organizations that installers and users have trusted for decades, who all offer and support a common connector interface. That powerful message can go a long way toward winning hearts and minds in bunches. That’s why I started this commentary with my first opinion, which is …

It's time to move toward a single FMP interface

The TIA’s effort to standardize a SFF fiber interface in the late 1990s failed because of forces that I characterize as techno-political. The consensus-based decision-making process resulted in votes being cast that served to protect an organization’s R&D investments at the cost of actual technological advancement. I say this matter-of-factly rather than as a criticism. In a standards-development setting, most participants represent their employers—the organizations that fund their standards-development efforts and, let’s not forget, keep them employed. Loyalty to these employers should be viewed neither as particularly noble nor as underhanded. It’s just what it is. Employee-Patrick has carried out countless activities that unaffiliated-Patrick would have done differently.  I’m not proud nor ashamed of that. My hope for FMP is that techno-political considerations do not hinder the establishment of a common connector interface. Ideally, all parties involved will view the establishment of a common interface as a catalyst for the proverbial rising tide that will lift all boats.

I don’t want to see the market take a couple years to decide what it likes best, the way it did with the LC connector. There’s more urgency with this than there was with that, in my opinion. User organizations deserve to have a clear path through which they can learn about, consider, and perhaps ultimately choose fault managed power for their facilities. Infrastructure installers can streamline their own path to FMP business if their crews learn the ins and outs of just a single connector interface. Now is the time to make this all happen.

If you’ve gotten this far, thanks for reading and hearing out my thoughts on this aspect of fault managed power. But what really matters is what you think about it. Would a single connector interface for FMP cable make you any more inclined to adopt the technology?

Email or call me if you feel strongly either way. I always learn the most when I hear it from you. [email protected] 603-891-9222.