I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional electric fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy

On 05/06/2013 04:40, Roy Brophy wrote:
I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional electric fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Why would you bother when it is now possible to run WiFi at that range
and have decent throughput with no risk of lightning damage to kit?

Mains and signal cables inside the same trunking is asking for trouble.


--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Martin,
Thanks for your response.

Good thought - I will give wifi a try first.

I’m a bit concerned that the wifi signal will be shielded by the foil on the Celotex insulation that will be in the walls, ceiling and floor.

Am I worrying unnecessesarily?

Thanks,
Roy

On 05/06/2013 10:43, Roy Brophy wrote:
Martin,
Thanks for your response.

Good thought - I will give wifi a try first.

I’m a bit concerned that the wifi signal will be shielded by the foil on the Celotex insulation that will be in the walls, ceiling and floor.

Am I worrying unnecessesarily?

Provided there is a window facing about the right direction I expect the
Wifi signal will get in fine. If all else fails I have run Wifi over
distance using a simple £8 USB Wifi with detachable aerial and an
external high gain antenna. That takes a bit of setting up but has the
big advantage of no risk of lightning ground emf destroying kit.

My first (expensive) Boca dialup modem was killed by a lightning strike.

Quick way to find out is to test it with a portable and a Wifi survey.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 07:23:58 +0100, Martin Brown wrote:

Why would you bother when it is now possible to run WiFi at that range
...

Provided there aren't a load of other neighbours all vying for the
rather restricted amount of WiFi channel space. In a
residential/urban area a WiFi survey would be wise before accepting
it as a solution. Survey done overa few days and at the times that
the link is likely to be used. Not just how many APs are there but
also the try to see what throughput you can get.

... and have decent throughput with no risk of lightning damage to kit?

If you want galvanic isolation I'd look at fibre. No problem of duct
sharing either. You can get pre-terminated cables (be careful with
thends, they are delicate and can pull of rather too easily) and I
don't think ethernet fibre adpaters are excessively expensive.

Mains and signal cables inside the same trunking is asking for trouble.

And technically illegal. The OP hasn't said if the run is aerial or
buried.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 05/06/13 10:43, Roy Brophy wrote:
Martin,
Thanks for your response.

Good thought - I will give wifi a try first.

Im a bit concerned that the wifi signal will be shielded by the foil on the Celotex insulation that will be in the walls, ceiling and floor.

Am I worrying unnecessesarily?
No. I have foil backed plasterboard and wifi range is about 15 feet
outside any room its in at best.

wifi is utter **** for the most part. And certainly wont yet do the
gigabit speeds cat 5 will.

Thanks,
Roy



--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On 05/06/13 10:59, Martin Brown wrote:
On 05/06/2013 10:43, Roy Brophy wrote:
Martin,
Thanks for your response.

Good thought - I will give wifi a try first.

Im a bit concerned that the wifi signal will be shielded by the foil
on the Celotex insulation that will be in the walls, ceiling and floor.

Am I worrying unnecessesarily?

Provided there is a window facing about the right direction I expect
the Wifi signal will get in fine. If all else fails I have run Wifi
over distance using a simple £8 USB Wifi with detachable aerial and an
external high gain antenna. That takes a bit of setting up but has the
big advantage of no risk of lightning ground emf destroying kit.

My first (expensive) Boca dialup modem was killed by a lightning strike.

Quick way to find out is to test it with a portable and a Wifi survey.

I've lost - or been handed the kit, broken - at least three wifi
equipped routers that dies postmajor thunderstorms.

In short lightning kills anything. Its at least unlikley to destroy a
cable buried underground, even if the kit at each end goes pear shaped.

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On Jun 5, 11:48*am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:

Provided there aren't a load of other neighbours all vying for the
rather restricted amount of WiFi channel space. In a
residential/urban area a WiFi survey would be wise before accepting
it as a solution. Survey done overa few days and at the times that
the link is likely to be used. Not just how many APs are there but
also the try to see what throughput you can get.

... and have decent throughput with no risk of lightning damage to kit?

If you have modern mobile you can download many apps for free that
tell you about Wi-Fi in your area.

Jonathan

Dave Liquorice wrote:
Mains and signal cables inside the same trunking is asking for trouble.

And technically illegal. The OP hasn't said if the run is aerial or
buried.

Surely not illegal, rather contravening the IEE wiring regulations (or
whatever they're called now).

It's also allowed in trunking with physical separation between sections
of the trunking isn't it? (Though that's being a bit picky I must admit)

--
Chris Green
·

On Wednesday 05 June 2013 11:48 Dave Liquorice wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 07:23:58 +0100, Martin Brown wrote:

Why would you bother when it is now possible to run WiFi at that range
...

Provided there aren't a load of other neighbours all vying for the
rather restricted amount of WiFi channel space. In a
residential/urban area a WiFi survey would be wise before accepting
it as a solution. Survey done overa few days and at the times that
the link is likely to be used. Not just how many APs are there but
also the try to see what throughput you can get.

... and have decent throughput with no risk of lightning damage to kit?

If you want galvanic isolation I'd look at fibre. No problem of duct
sharing either. You can get pre-terminated cables (be careful with
thends, they are delicate and can pull of rather too easily) and I
don't think ethernet fibre adpaters are excessively expensive.

Mains and signal cables inside the same trunking is asking for trouble.

And technically illegal. The OP hasn't said if the run is aerial or
buried.


Another solution is to shove fibre down there with a couple of cheap end
transponders on each end.
--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

Reading this on the web? See:
http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 11:58:01 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I've lost - or been handed the kit, broken - at least three wifi
equipped routers that dies postmajor thunderstorms.

In short lightning kills anything. Its at least unlikley to destroy a
cable buried underground, even if the kit at each end goes pear shaped.

Yep anything with a few feet of wire attached is vulnerable to damage
froma lighting strike within a few hundrd yards. Had an IP webcam
and network card connected by 12' Cat5 zapped... The Webcam still
works, just not via the ethernet port, several components on the card
were carbonised.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wed, 5 Jun 2013 04:38:44 -0700 (PDT), Jonathan wrote:

Survey done overa few days and at the times that the link is
likely to
be used. Not just how many APs are there but also the try to see
what
throughput you can get.

If you have modern mobile you can download many apps for free that
tell you about Wi-Fi in your area.

They'll tell you what is on which channel but do any analyise the
traffic levels for each AP they can hear? A channel with 9 AP's all
doing nothing but beaconing is probably a better one to choose than a
channel with 3 AP's all streaming video... Without looking at the
traffic that wouldn't be the obvious choice.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Wednesday 05 June 2013 12:45 wrote in uk.d-i-y:

Dave Liquorice wrote:
Mains and signal cables inside the same trunking is asking for trouble.

And technically illegal. The OP hasn't said if the run is aerial or
buried.

Surely not illegal, rather contravening the IEE wiring regulations (or
whatever they're called now).

It's also allowed in trunking with physical separation between sections
of the trunking isn't it? (Though that's being a bit picky I must admit)


It's allowed if both cables are rated to the voltage of the higher - though
this may not be the case for standard cat5e.

Having said that, Cat5e is isolated at both ends and often lobbed under
computer room floors or in trunking on top of a load of mains cables so
there isn't really a problem in reality with dry installations.

However, stuck in an underground duct full of water (it may be one day) a
minor failure of the LV (mains) cable insulation could lead to the ELV
cables becoming significantly energised (due to their weaker insulation) and
the possibility of colding a plugged in bare RJ45 whilst standing just
outside the shed on wet grass in flipflops is not totally improbable.

So in this case, fiber, seperate ducts or run the Cat5e in a small flexi
conduit inside the larger duct would seem to be a valid requirement.

--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

Reading this on the web? See:
http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

On 05/06/2013 10:59, Martin Brown wrote:
On 05/06/2013 10:43, Roy Brophy wrote:
Martin,
Thanks for your response.

Good thought - I will give wifi a try first.

I’m a bit concerned that the wifi signal will be shielded by the foil
on the Celotex insulation that will be in the walls, ceiling and floor.

Am I worrying unnecessesarily?

Provided there is a window facing about the right direction I expect the
Wifi signal will get in fine. If all else fails I have run Wifi over
distance using a simple £8 USB Wifi with detachable aerial and an
external high gain antenna. That takes a bit of setting up but has the
big advantage of no risk of lightning ground emf destroying kit.

My first (expensive) Boca dialup modem was killed by a lightning strike.

Quick way to find out is to test it with a portable and a Wifi survey.

If you want to run building to building wifi, then you tend to get far
superior results with proper external wireless bridge units, rather than
normal wifi kit.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On 05/06/2013 12:57, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013 04:38:44 -0700 (PDT), Jonathan wrote:

Survey done overa few days and at the times that the link is
likely to
be used. Not just how many APs are there but also the try to see
what
throughput you can get.

If you have modern mobile you can download many apps for free that
tell you about Wi-Fi in your area.

They'll tell you what is on which channel but do any analyise the
traffic levels for each AP they can hear? A channel with 9 AP's all
doing nothing but beaconing is probably a better one to choose than a
channel with 3 AP's all streaming video... Without looking at the
traffic that wouldn't be the obvious choice.


Do they show video senders?
That is what was killing wifi around here (until I turned it off).

On Jun 5, 12:47*pm, Tim Watts wrote:eth

Another solution is to shove fibre down there with a couple of cheap end
transponders on each end.
--

You could do the whole job with fibre for around £50 sourcing
everything from eBay.

30m long multimode patch cables (OM1 65um, OM2 or OM3 50um) with
duplex LC connectors at each end can be obtained for a few pounds each
if you wait for a week or two. OM3 is better than OM2 which is better
than OM1, but for such short lengths it will make no difference at all
which you use. Avoid single mode because the transceivers usually
cost more and you don't need to send the data many kilometres anyway.

850nm SFP multi-mode transceivers are often available for £0.99 +
postage in speed ratings of 1, 2 or 4 Gbit/s. It doesn't matter
whether they are specified for gigabit ethernet or fibre channel -
either will work fine for gigabit ethernet. It doesn't matter what
make they are either.

Gigabit media converters such as TP-Link MC220L are just under £20
each. Note that these ONLY work at Gbit speed, not 10/100Mbit/s.
Alternatively, some low-cost network switches which work at
10/100/1000 take SFP optical transceivers. The cheap ones don't care
what make of SFP treansceivers you use. GS110TP is an example of a
nice switch which works with any make of SFP, but there are cheaper
ones around too.

John

All,

Many thanks for all the responses - very helpful and much food for thought.

I think I will probably end up going the fibre route. I have never used that before so it will be interesting and something new!

When I do it in a couple of months time I'll try to remember to post back here with the results.

Roy

On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 19:39:13 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

They'll tell you what is on which channel but do any analyise the
traffic levels for each AP they can hear? A channel with 9 AP's
all
doing nothing but beaconing is probably a better one to choose
than a
channel with 3 AP's all streaming video... Without looking at the
traffic that wouldn't be the obvious choice.

Do they show video senders? That is what was killing wifi around here
(until I turned it off).

Nope, nor leaky microwaves, BlueTooth etc etc...

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 06/06/13 09:16, RzB wrote:
All,

Many thanks for all the responses - very helpful and much food for thought.

I think I will probably end up going the fibre route. I have never used that before so it will be interesting and something new!

When I do it in a couple of months time I'll try to remember to post back here with the results.

Roy
The chief problems with fibre are terminating it, and the fragility of
the fibre.

A pre-made length installed very carefully in smooth ducting should be OK.

http://www.blackbox.co.uk/gb-gb/1260...Media/V1.F5086

I think an ethernet bridge of fibre is easy to get the bits for.

http://www.blackbox.co.uk/gb-gb/fi/1...Mbps,Switched/

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On Thursday 06 June 2013 09:16 RzB wrote in uk.d-i-y:

All,

Many thanks for all the responses - very helpful and much food for
thought.

I think I will probably end up going the fibre route. I have never used
that before so it will be interesting and something new!

When I do it in a couple of months time I'll try to remember to post back
here with the results.

Roy

I am NOT a fibre expert (though I've used it industrially and seen it
terminated by experts).

With that proviso, this might be worth some checking on Google for reviews
etc:

http://www.ebuyer.com/268713-tp-link...rter-1000base-
sx-1000base-t-rj-45-sc-multi-mode-external-up-mc200cm

£37 each (you need 2 obviously), gigabit, short range (for fibre) - more
than what you need.


Here's the full spec:

http://uk.tp-link.com/products/detai...l=MC200CM#spec

Now - the fibre. I would suggest getting preterminated patches as
termination is fiddly and needs special tools. Just buy something longer
than you need and coil (not fold or knot!) the excess.

Protect the connector[1] when pulling through duct and do not pull by the
connector. In fact, pull very gently as it is quite easy to damage.

[1] Perhaps put the end of the cable and connectors in a 40mm long bit of
blanked off 15mm pipe/conduit and tape the pipe to the fibre with insulating
tape - and fix the pull cord to the blanked end of the pipe. You pull the
protective cover which in turn pulls the cable by the sheath. Should work
through a smooth duct. Pull the fiber last.


As to the cable - the above device needs:

1) SC terminators on both ends. These are chunky but are actually in 2
halves so you can split them and pull one back slightly to fit the pulling
cover pipe.

2) You'll need either 62.5/125um fiber for 220m range or 50/125um fiber for
500m range. Assuming the former, this will do:

http://www.netstoredirect.com/fibre-...c-fibre-patch-
cables.html?gclid=CNDLnKyPz7cCFVHItAodGA0Ang

£18 buys a 30m lead. 10m and 20m also available.

BTW - lasers are dangerous, and invisible to the eye. DO NOT go peering into
the ends of the cable or the adaptors. Having said that, these ones are not
too bad as they are low power short range. Some of the long haul ones are
pretty lethal.

To test the cable before and after pulling, have an assistant shine a torch
into one end - the other end should light up as 2 bright pinpricks of light,
similar brightness for each fibre. If the cable is broken, it is usually
fairly obvious at this stage.

HTH

Tim


--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

Reading this on the web? See:
http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

In article , Roy
Brophy scribeth thus
I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional electric fire /
kettle kicking in and out.

Roy

If I were doing this I'd just use ordinary CAT5 cable for that length.
OK I know the "regs" have their views on CAT 5 being next to mains
cables but unless the sheathing on your SWA isn't earthed;-? It won't be
electrically any different to a water pipe in effect!.

It will be fine. We've seen and used this in many adverse applications
and really the only problems we have had are in radio field strengths at
levels you just will not get in your back yard!.

Fibre is very good stuff and we have used that over distances of around
1 KM or so and very good it is too but for this application its really
overkill.

I wouldn't worry about lightning either, we use CAT 5 on some very
elevated structures and have yet to have a problem..

And you won't have any of the problems that might beset wireless outside
in range of other peoples wireless networks....
--
Tony Sayer

On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional electric
fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a minimum of
12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through it. The
pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a draw wire!).
You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that - something that wifi
can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper than fibre. OTOH, if you
can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre is really the only answer.

In article om, mick
scribeth thus
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional electric
fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a minimum of
12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through it. The
pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a draw wire!).
You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that - something that wifi
can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper than fibre. OTOH, if you
can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre is really the only answer.


Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very effectively
shielded?.

CAT 5 is a very good balanced transmission system and is inherently good
at rejecting other electric fields, so why so far away?..

--
Tony Sayer

On Friday 07 June 2013 20:59 mick wrote in uk.d-i-y:

On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional electric
fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a minimum of
12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through it. The
pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a draw wire!).
You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that - something that wifi
can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper than fibre. OTOH, if you
can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre is really the only answer.

Cat5e is sufficient for gig (deja-vu I detect...)


--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

Reading this on the web? See:
http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

On Thursday, 6 June 2013 09:16:46 UTC+1, RzB wrote:
All,



Many thanks for all the responses - very helpful and much food for thought.



I think I will probably end up going the fibre route. I have never used that before so it will be interesting and something new!



When I do it in a couple of months time I'll try to remember to post back here with the results.



Roy

Hmmm... another option is this...

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/n...wpa281kit.html

Is there any reason why that wouldn't work down the SWA and through the CU in the studio?

Roy

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 05:19:09 -0700 (PDT), RzB wrote:

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/n.../powerline/tl-
wpa281kit.html

Is there any reason why that wouldn't work down the SWA and through the
CU in the studio?

Both plugin so you have something like:

House ring MCB/RCD CU RCD SWA CU MCB/RCD Studio ring.

It's the MCB/RCDs that contain series coils that will mess things up.
These things work best on the same ring, noticable degredation across
rings on the same CU. It might work but don't expect 200 Mbps... Not
that you get that through put anyway, that's the raw rate and
possibly both ways added together. I notice that the ethernet side is
100 Mbps max so what is the point of a 200 Mbps link? Marketing pah!

Not to mention the amount of RF crap the spray all over the Shortwave
Bands.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 17/07/13 13:50, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 05:19:09 -0700 (PDT), RzB wrote:

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/n.../powerline/tl-
wpa281kit.html

Is there any reason why that wouldn't work down the SWA and through the
CU in the studio?
Both plugin so you have something like:

House ring MCB/RCD CU RCD SWA CU MCB/RCD Studio ring.

It's the MCB/RCDs that contain series coils that will mess things up.
These things work best on the same ring, noticable degredation across
rings on the same CU. It might work but don't expect 200 Mbps... Not
that you get that through put anyway, that's the raw rate and
possibly both ways added together. I notice that the ethernet side is
100 Mbps max so what is the point of a 200 Mbps link? Marketing pah!

Not to mention the amount of RF crap the spray all over the Shortwave
Bands.

You can run two mains plug setups and bridge them with an ethernet cable
somewhere.

But running cat 5 aint that hard.
remember if you use ethernet switches, you can run pretty long cables,
or even fibre.

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On 17/07/2013 13:50, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 05:19:09 -0700 (PDT), RzB wrote:

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/n.../powerline/tl-
wpa281kit.html

Is there any reason why that wouldn't work down the SWA and through the
CU in the studio?

Both plugin so you have something like:

House ring MCB/RCD CU RCD SWA CU MCB/RCD Studio ring.

It's the MCB/RCDs that contain series coils that will mess things up.
These things work best on the same ring, noticable degredation across
rings on the same CU. It might work but don't expect 200 Mbps... Not

I do something similar to get data to my workshop. Throughput is not
great, but ok for browsing the web or accessing a few files remotely.

I found I needed to use some "hi power" homeplugs to achieve the link
reliably.

(mine goes through three CUs, three RCDs, one fuse and two MCBs)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 05:19:09 -0700 (PDT), RzB wrote:

http://www.novatech.co.uk/products/n.../powerline/tl-
wpa281kit.html

Is there any reason why that wouldn't work down the SWA and through the
CU in the studio?

Both plugin so you have something like:

House ring MCB/RCD CU RCD SWA CU MCB/RCD Studio ring.

It's the MCB/RCDs that contain series coils that will mess things up.
These things work best on the same ring, noticable degredation across
rings on the same CU. It might work but don't expect 200 Mbps... Not
that you get that through put anyway, that's the raw rate and
possibly both ways added together. I notice that the ethernet side is
100 Mbps max so what is the point of a 200 Mbps link? Marketing pah!

Not to mention the amount of RF crap the spray all over the Shortwave
Bands.


And elsewhere fM and DAB too!. Why ever does the OP not just pull a lump
of CAT 5 cable, after all his mains cable is SWA thats very well
shielded agin egress and ingress. Seems a steam hammer to crack a
nut;!...
--
Tony Sayer

On 07/06/2013 22:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article om, mick
scribeth thus
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional electric
fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a minimum of
12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through it. The
pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a draw wire!).
You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that - something that wifi
can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper than fibre. OTOH, if you
can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre is really the only answer.


Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very effectively
shielded?.

CAT 5 is a very good balanced transmission system and is inherently good
at rejecting other electric fields, so why so far away?..


I'm running some cat6 alongside mains cable in places - obviously, it's
the easiest route to follow through a house. I did read that it's not
advisable, but thought I'd give it a try and so far, so good. Do you
think that ethernet-next-to-mains-equals-disaster is an urban myth?

--
Cheers, Rob

“Pessimism of the spirit; optimism of the will” Antonio Gramsci

On 17/07/13 18:08, RJH wrote:
On 07/06/2013 22:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article om, mick
scribeth thus
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional
electric
fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a
minimum of
12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through
it. The
pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a draw
wire!).
You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that - something
that wifi
can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper than fibre. OTOH, if you
can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre is really the only answer.


Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very effectively
shielded?.

CAT 5 is a very good balanced transmission system and is inherently good
at rejecting other electric fields, so why so far away?..


I'm running some cat6 alongside mains cable in places - obviously,
it's the easiest route to follow through a house. I did read that it's
not advisable, but thought I'd give it a try and so far, so good. Do
you think that ethernet-next-to-mains-equals-disaster is an urban myth?

no. Its just rather poor practice, because potentially under very
unusual circs. you might get a shock inserting your todger into a cat 5
socket.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

On 17/07/2013 18:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/13 18:08, RJH wrote:
On 07/06/2013 22:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article om, mick
scribeth thus
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional
electric
fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a
minimum of
12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through
it. The
pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a draw
wire!).
You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that - something
that wifi
can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper than fibre. OTOH, if you
can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre is really the only answer.


Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very effectively
shielded?.

CAT 5 is a very good balanced transmission system and is inherently good
at rejecting other electric fields, so why so far away?..


I'm running some cat6 alongside mains cable in places - obviously,
it's the easiest route to follow through a house. I did read that it's
not advisable, but thought I'd give it a try and so far, so good. Do
you think that ethernet-next-to-mains-equals-disaster is an urban myth?

no. Its just rather poor practice, because potentially under very
unusual circs. you might get a shock inserting your todger into a cat 5
socket.

The main complaint is from radio hams, since they can stick lots of
interference into the HF band, and mains wiring is not shielded or
balanced, so it does not prevent the wire broadcasting to the neighbours.

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:08:49 +0100, RJH wrote:

On 07/06/2013 22:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article om, mick
scribeth thus
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional
electric fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a minimum
of 12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through
it. The pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a
draw wire!). You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that -
something that wifi can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper
than fibre. OTOH, if you can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre
is really the only answer.


Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very
effectively shielded?.

CAT 5 is a very good balanced transmission system and is inherently
good at rejecting other electric fields, so why so far away?..


I'm running some cat6 alongside mains cable in places - obviously, it's
the easiest route to follow through a house. I did read that it's not
advisable, but thought I'd give it a try and so far, so good. Do you
think that ethernet-next-to-mains-equals-disaster is an urban myth?

It's no urban myth. Although the signal down the network cable is
balanced, that balance can never be perfect. Interference from the mains
cable induces a 50Hz hum in the cat5 - which it can handle most of the
time. The problems tend to arise when you get spikes on the mains -
sometimes the result of dimmers etc. Those aren't always filtered out
completely. As the network is self-correcting it will keep asking for
packets to be repeated if they are corrupted. The overall result is that
the network slows down.

The more current is on the mains supply, and the worse the loads on it,
the more noise it will radiate. Consequently you'll find that in
distribution systems in buildings any data cables will be spaced well
away from power cables.

The risk from shock on the network system is as much as grabbing hold of
the (insulated) mains cable.

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:08:49 +0100, RJH wrote:

On 07/06/2013 22:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article om, mick
scribeth thus
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional
electric fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a minimum
of 12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through
it. The pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a
draw wire!). You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that -
something that wifi can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper
than fibre. OTOH, if you can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre
is really the only answer.


Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very
effectively shielded?.

CAT 5 is a very good balanced transmission system and is inherently
good at rejecting other electric fields, so why so far away?..


I'm running some cat6 alongside mains cable in places - obviously, it's
the easiest route to follow through a house. I did read that it's not
advisable, but thought I'd give it a try and so far, so good. Do you
think that ethernet-next-to-mains-equals-disaster is an urban myth?


By the way, SWA isn't a very good screen at networking frequencies. It's
better not to depend on it.

As for cat5 being balanced, look at it this way: both wires in the pair
are being moved up and down in voltage at 50Hz by mains hum. Data is
carried in the difference between the voltage on the pairs. At some point
the 1s and 0s become 1s and 1s, as the hum voltage overcomes the
differential voltage at the top and bottom ends of the 50Hz waveform.
That's when your network dies.

You can get screened cat5, which helps with the hum problem a lot, but it
also slows down the network due to capacitance to earth. Don't use it on
long runs. Better to avoid running close to mains wiring for more than
about 3m.

On Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:08:49 +0100, RJH wrote:

Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very
effectively shielded?.

Does seem very OTT, in offices the network cabling is simply in a
seperate compartment of the dado trunking couple of inches at most.

Do you think that ethernet-next-to-mains-equals-disaster is an urban
myth?

In the normal home interference shouldn't be a problem. If you or a
neighbour are into arc welding and have a BFO welder that might be.
I'd keep the network cable away from mains by a couple of inches and
if sharing a hole run one or the other through a bit of plastic
conduit. That's mainly because the insulation on Cat5 isn't rated for
mains voltages but it's unlikely to be a problem in the real world.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 18 Jul 2013 07:45:58 GMT, mick wrote:

As for cat5 being balanced, look at it this way: both wires in the pair
are being moved up and down in voltage at 50Hz by mains hum. Data is
carried in the difference between the voltage on the pairs.

Agreed.

At some point the 1s and 0s become 1s and 1s, as the hum voltage
overcomes the differential voltage at the top and bottom ends of the
50Hz waveform.

How? Show the maths.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 09:17:59 +0100, Dave Liquorice wrote:

On 18 Jul 2013 07:45:58 GMT, mick wrote:

As for cat5 being balanced, look at it this way: both wires in the pair
are being moved up and down in voltage at 50Hz by mains hum. Data is
carried in the difference between the voltage on the pairs.

Agreed.

At some point the 1s and 0s become 1s and 1s, as the hum voltage
overcomes the differential voltage at the top and bottom ends of the
50Hz waveform.

How? Show the maths.


I'll stick with peak-peak voltages. RMS would only confuse things.

The differential voltage between the cores is 2.2 to 2.8v. Say 2.5v
If the induced voltage is, say, 6v then both cores move up and down by 3v
relative to 0v.
So, the maximum voltage on one core is 1.25+3=4.75v.
At the same moment the voltage on the other core will be -1.25-3=-4.75

Those conditions are fine if the receiver can accept 5v to earth on both
inputs.

As the hum voltage is increased to, say, 18v (which is quite possible
with capacitive coupling) you would get +/- 19.25v to earth, even though
the differential voltage is still 2.5v.

That would still be ok for a +/-20v input, but now add 5v symmetrical
noise spikes on top of that. The signals are now +/-24.25v, which would
(hopefully) get clamped by the protective devices. You are now getting 1s
and 1s though, as 24.25-1.25=23v (greater than 20v). There isn't enough
differential swing to get 0s.

A 5v spike on top of a 20v waveform wouldn't be unusual if the cat5 is
close (say 10-20mm) to mains wiring.

In article , John
Rumm scribeth thus
On 17/07/2013 18:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/13 18:08, RJH wrote:
On 07/06/2013 22:02, tony sayer wrote:
In article om, mick
scribeth thus
On Tue, 04 Jun 2013 20:40:24 -0700, Roy Brophy wrote:

I am running a Cat 5 cable close to a 6mm SWA cable over a 15M run.

Is it worth using shielded Cat 5?

It's supplying a garden studio so there will be the occasional
electric
fire / kettle kicking in and out.

Roy


At 15m and if trenching allowed, I'd just bury some hosepipe a
minimum of
12" (preferably 24") away from the armoured & thread cat6 through
it. The
pipe lets you pull another through if you need to (include a draw
wire!).
You should be able to use gigabit ethernet over that - something
that wifi
can only dream about. It's simpler and cheaper than fibre. OTOH, if you
can't allow that sort of spacing, then fibre is really the only answer.


Why would you need to be 2 foot away from a cable thats very effectively
shielded?.

CAT 5 is a very good balanced transmission system and is inherently good
at rejecting other electric fields, so why so far away?..


I'm running some cat6 alongside mains cable in places - obviously,
it's the easiest route to follow through a house. I did read that it's
not advisable, but thought I'd give it a try and so far, so good. Do
you think that ethernet-next-to-mains-equals-disaster is an urban myth?

no. Its just rather poor practice, because potentially under very
unusual circs. you might get a shock inserting your todger into a cat 5
socket.

The main complaint is from radio hams, since they can stick lots of
interference into the HF band, and mains wiring is not shielded or
balanced, so it does not prevent the wire broadcasting to the neighbours.


The problem manifests itself up at VHF on FM and DAB transmissions to
and it does have quite an effect if your received signals aren't that
strong...


I'm surprised that Ofcom allow the things but then again .. Ofcom;?..


Chapter and verse from BBC research..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/publications/whitepaper195
--
Tony Sayer

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On 18 Jul 2013 07:45:58 GMT, mick wrote:

As for cat5 being balanced, look at it this way: both wires in the pair
are being moved up and down in voltage at 50Hz by mains hum. Data is
carried in the difference between the voltage on the pairs.

Agreed.

At some point the 1s and 0s become 1s and 1s, as the hum voltage
overcomes the differential voltage at the top and bottom ends of the
50Hz waveform.

How? Show the maths.


Have you ever tried this in practice?..

We have, and the only place where we had a problem, now fixed, was
running some CAT 5 right next (within 4 foot) on a radio mast to some
transmitting dipoles radiating some 100 watts in the FM band!..

That caused a problem for some microwave link units connected to the CAT
5 cable but we now have replaced that with Ubiquity screened cable which
BTW is excellent mechanical stuff as well and that cured that
completely.,

I rather doubt that any domestic situation would have such a problem
somehow;!...


I know of other installations where power cables are right next to
bundles of CAT 5 cables and all is well running at 100 and gigabit
rates.

I think you'll find that balanced line working such as what CAT 5 is to
be very immune to external interferer's...

In fact some 10 years ago I put a SWA cable into my shed some 100 feet
away from the house chucked in the same trench as the SWA were a couple
of bits of CAT 5 cable (temporary use of course!). One was in use for
the phone the other a PC point. Never a moments trouble even when using
arc welders and the like;!...
--
Tony Sayer

On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:46:03 +0100, tony sayer wrote:

In article o.uk, Dave
Liquorice scribeth thus
On 18 Jul 2013 07:45:58 GMT, mick wrote:

As for cat5 being balanced, look at it this way: both wires in the
pair are being moved up and down in voltage at 50Hz by mains hum. Data
is carried in the difference between the voltage on the pairs.

Agreed.

At some point the 1s and 0s become 1s and 1s, as the hum voltage
overcomes the differential voltage at the top and bottom ends of the
50Hz waveform.

How? Show the maths.


Have you ever tried this in practice?..

We have, and the only place where we had a problem, now fixed, was
running some CAT 5 right next (within 4 foot) on a radio mast to some
transmitting dipoles radiating some 100 watts in the FM band!..

That caused a problem for some microwave link units connected to the CAT
5 cable but we now have replaced that with Ubiquity screened cable which
BTW is excellent mechanical stuff as well and that cured that
completely.,

I rather doubt that any domestic situation would have such a problem
somehow;!...


I know of other installations where power cables are right next to
bundles of CAT 5 cables and all is well running at 100 and gigabit
rates.

I think you'll find that balanced line working such as what CAT 5 is to
be very immune to external interferer's...

In fact some 10 years ago I put a SWA cable into my shed some 100 feet
away from the house chucked in the same trench as the SWA were a couple
of bits of CAT 5 cable (temporary use of course!). One was in use for
the phone the other a PC point. Never a moments trouble even when using
arc welders and the like;!...


I think the problem only really appears where the hum level is quite high
and there is liable to be mains noise on top of that. Quite typical in,
say, engineering works where there is a relatively high load and plenty
of noise from SMPS and motor speed controllers. It becomes very relevant
where the bandwidth of the network is important as speed is definitely
compromised. Nowadays it's almost as cheap to go fibre instead of cat5e
on any long lengths between buildings anyway.

Of course, you don't see the network slowing down unless you monitor it
over a period of time. Bursts of noise slow it down, but it speeds up
again between the bursts!

As you say, in domestic applications it probably isn't so important. In
the OP's case I'd be tempted to bury cat5e or cat6 in hosepipe as I said
earlier. The distance isn't great, the pipe gives some protection and
also a little bit of spacing from the SWA. The more spacing, the more
consistent the network speed will be. Best results would probably be with
utp at about 1' away. Perfectly acceptable results would probably be with
ftp at a couple of inches away, but the cable is more expensive.