Web Host Chat - The UK's host forum since 2001!
RECOMMENDED HOSTS
Colocation Rack Services
UK Web & Reseller Hosting
UK Leased Lines
VMWare Cloud Servers
Advertise here!
Results 1 to 6 of 6
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Pete-CCS

Thread: Partial locked racks (half rack, quarter rack) power provisioning?

  1. #1
    Registered User Array

    Partial locked racks (half rack, quarter rack) power provisioning?

    There is clearly a level of demand in the market for lockable sub full racks, and if you're a colocation operator increasingly I think this is something that you just need to offer.

    I'm really interested in how people provision power to these as I have seen it done a number of ways. For example, some are just slotting in compartment racks, putting in a 32a/16a to 4X 10a 'splitter' PDU and running the resulting IEC C14 into each compartment. Some are then also running copper network in the same vertical tray down the side of the rack. This seems incredibly offensive to me and I could never ever do it like this, but some seem to accept it.

    At another extreme, I've seen some facilities doing it the 'traditional' way, but this means they are building in 8 commando drops to a single footprint (4x 16a commando on the 'A' distribution, 4X 16a commando on the 'B' distribution) - mostly these are 2.5mm whips, or bus bar drops both with either 6a or 10a MCBs.

    How are you seeing this done, or doing this?

  2. #2
    91 rating
    4 reviews
    Posts 7974
    Post rank 12 (-10)
    Array
    4x16s, one dropped to each. 2 from A feed, 2 from B feed.
    No A+B available in quarters, unless you are prepared to take two adjacent ones when you then get an A+B.

    This isn't for a technical reason, it is merely that the PDUs would gobble 2/11s of the rack rather than 1/11th on a single feed, and space is already at a premium in qtrs
    VN-Jonathan likes this.
    Peter Knapp - CCS Leeds Ltd - www.ccsleeds.co.uk
    Coal Road, Leeds. LS14 2AQ / Co. reg: 03507910 / VAT reg: GB 698 2027 05 / Tel: 0113 294 66 99
    UK Leased Lines | Hosted VoIP & SIP Trunks | EFM - Ethernet First Mile
    Free Install and Cisco Router on Fully Managed EFM at up to 20Mb/s only 300 per month

  3. #3
    Registered User Array
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete-CCS View Post
    4x16s, one dropped to each. 2 from A feed, 2 from B feed.
    No A+B available in quarters, unless you are prepared to take two adjacent ones when you then get an A+B.

    This isn't for a technical reason, it is merely that the PDUs would gobble 2/11s of the rack rather than 1/11th on a single feed, and space is already at a premium in qtrs
    Thank you. I've seen this too, seems reasonable as long as the customer is aware but sadly isn't suitable you have 2N(+1) infrastructure which would dictate dual feeds. Running 8 Commandos to each footprint along with one or two spares is not really that sensible either though!

    I know a lot of people see horizontal PDUs as 'taking a U' but a lot of kit is still single mount only, if you have two front mounted network switches or firewalls or lower powered servers then the PDUs will happily sit behind them without causing airflow issues. If space in the rack is the only issue why not put in a 1U ATS instead of 2X1u PDUs?

  4. #4
    91 rating
    4 reviews
    Posts 7974
    Post rank 12 (-10)
    Array
    Quote Originally Posted by connected View Post
    Thank you. I've seen this too, seems reasonable as long as the customer is aware but sadly isn't suitable you have 2N(+1) infrastructure which would dictate dual feeds. Running 8 Commandos to each footprint along with one or two spares is not really that sensible either though!

    I know a lot of people see horizontal PDUs as 'taking a U' but a lot of kit is still single mount only, if you have two front mounted network switches or firewalls or lower powered servers then the PDUs will happily sit behind them without causing airflow issues. If space in the rack is the only issue why not put in a 1U ATS instead of 2X1u PDUs?

    You don't have to take it on commandos to the quarters. Dependent on your supply you could use either smaller connectors (Powercons?) or hard wire it too.

    We only have one customer who is running A+B in quarters in two adjacent ones. The rest seem happy with their own dedicated breaker.

    And I would never recommend an A+B into an in-rack ATS. What is the point of having a 2N infrastructure then sticking both feeds into a 1N ATS device???
    Peter Knapp - CCS Leeds Ltd - www.ccsleeds.co.uk
    Coal Road, Leeds. LS14 2AQ / Co. reg: 03507910 / VAT reg: GB 698 2027 05 / Tel: 0113 294 66 99
    UK Leased Lines | Hosted VoIP & SIP Trunks | EFM - Ethernet First Mile
    Free Install and Cisco Router on Fully Managed EFM at up to 20Mb/s only 300 per month

  5. #5
    Registered User Array
    So the commandos would be presented above the rack, on the bus bar breakout or DIN rail and then it would usually go into the quarters as C13 or C19 connectors.

    I agree that it's not ideal, but will probably work out as more resilient than just a single feed and PDU - ultimate you are betting on the failure rate of a APC ATS VS the total amount of time you spend doing maintenance (and on any outages) per feed.
    Last edited by connected; 3 Weeks Ago at 01:03 PM.

  6. #6
    601 rating
    4 reviews
    Posts 2471
    Post rank 5 (2)
    Array
    We do 3 footprints of each if deploying, then deliver three phase feeds to a submain which splits out into appropriate breakered feeds into each compartment (whether it be half or quarters, breakers at appropriate sizing).

    As we're deploying in 3 footprints, we don't need to use further ways on the distribution boards which are standardised at 32A, and every footprint has A+B by default.

    Cables via internal trunking within the racks, and we supply PDUs for customers if they so wish in nice green and blue to signify A/B feed.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1