....ie, one of those pass-through wind-up reels that you can readily obtain for mains cable extensions, TV coax, phone cables - in fact pretty much any form of cable except CAT5E as far as I can see!

Does anyone know of one? I currently have an intermittently used 10m patch cable which is quite useful for various jobs, and it would be convenient just to be able to quickly wind it up. Why can't I find one, even from a pikey Hong Kong ebay seller? Is the cable structure just not up to it?

Thanks
David

On 01/09/13 19:23, Lobster wrote:
...ie, one of those pass-through wind-up reels that you can readily obtain for mains cable extensions, TV coax, phone cables - in fact pretty much any form of cable except CAT5E as far as I can see!

Does anyone know of one? I currently have an intermittently used 10m patch cable which is quite useful for various jobs, and it would be convenient just to be able to quickly wind it up. Why can't I find one, even from a pikey Hong Kong ebay seller? Is the cable structure just not up to it?

Thanks
David

I'd have thought patch cable - stranded - would be OK. Why not make one?

(sorry, replied by email first. Just can't get used to Thunderbird's
reply button)

On Monday, 2 September 2013 04:09:33 UTC+1, John Rumm wrote:
On 01/09/2013 19:23, Lobster wrote:

...ie, one of those pass-through wind-up reels that you can readily

obtain for mains cable extensions, TV coax, phone cables - in fact

pretty much any form of cable except CAT5E as far as I can see!



Does anyone know of one? I currently have an intermittently used 10m

patch cable which is quite useful for various jobs, and it would be

convenient just to be able to quickly wind it up. Why can't I find

one, even from a pikey Hong Kong ebay seller? Is the cable structure

just not up to it?



RS had one...

http://uk.rs-online.com/web/p/cat5-c...blies/0252891/

Yep - just what I'm after!

It does seem I'm not missing the obvious, anyway - I wonder why they are so hard to come by, compared with other types of cable reel? Must be the all-pervading prevalence of wifi these days I suppose...

Failing that, get a reel from CPC, slap a long patch lead on it, and use
a female/female coupler at one end if you need a socket.

I suppose so... however all empty reels that I could see during my searches seemed to be big buggers intended for mains flex; not really appropriate for what I'm after. I'll stick with what I have, I guess

Thanks anyway!
David

En el artículo ,
escribió:

It does seem I'm not missing the obvious, anyway - I wonder why they are so hard
to come by, compared with other types of cable reel?

I can think of a few reasons:

* putting Cat5 on a reel would make it more liable to kink as it is
wound and unwound. Kinking Cat5 cable is a no-no; it can have a serious
adverse impact on performance.

* it would need to be stranded cable. Solid cable would (eventually)
fracture. Stranded cable is only intended to be used for patch leads of
short length (up to 5m ish) between e.g. the wall outlet and the device.

* a partly-uncoiled reel might be more prone to picking up external
interference as the loops form an antenna

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On 02/09/13 11:01, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artÃ*culo ,
escribió:

It does seem I'm not missing the obvious, anyway - I wonder why they are so hard
to come by, compared with other types of cable reel?
I can think of a few reasons:

* putting Cat5 on a reel would make it more liable to kink as it is
wound and unwound. Kinking Cat5 cable is a no-no; it can have a serious
adverse impact on performance.

* it would need to be stranded cable. Solid cable would (eventually)
fracture. Stranded cable is only intended to be used for patch leads of
short length (up to 5m ish) between e.g. the wall outlet and the device.

* a partly-uncoiled reel might be more prone to picking up external
interference as the loops form an antenna

* the rated length on an 100mbps ethernet link is no more than about
10m which is scarcely worth putting on a reel

--
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.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
On 02/09/13 11:01, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artÃ*culo ,
escribió:

It does seem I'm not missing the obvious, anyway - I wonder why they are so hard
to come by, compared with other types of cable reel?
I can think of a few reasons:

* putting Cat5 on a reel would make it more liable to kink as it is
wound and unwound. Kinking Cat5 cable is a no-no; it can have a serious
adverse impact on performance.

* it would need to be stranded cable. Solid cable would (eventually)
fracture. Stranded cable is only intended to be used for patch leads of
short length (up to 5m ish) between e.g. the wall outlet and the device.

* a partly-uncoiled reel might be more prone to picking up external
interference as the loops form an antenna

* the rated length on an 100mbps ethernet link is no more than about
10m which is scarcely worth putting on a reel

100m actually.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 02/09/2013 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/09/13 11:01, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artÃ*culo ,
escribió:

It does seem I'm not missing the obvious, anyway - I wonder why they
are so hard
to come by, compared with other types of cable reel?
I can think of a few reasons:

* putting Cat5 on a reel would make it more liable to kink as it is
wound and unwound. Kinking Cat5 cable is a no-no; it can have a serious
adverse impact on performance.

* it would need to be stranded cable. Solid cable would (eventually)
fracture. Stranded cable is only intended to be used for patch leads of
short length (up to 5m ish) between e.g. the wall outlet and the device.

* a partly-uncoiled reel might be more prone to picking up external
interference as the loops form an antenna

* the rated length on an 100mbps ethernet link is no more than about
10m which is scarcely worth putting on a reel

Huh?


--
Cheers,

John.

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

On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 19:37:50 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 02/09/2013 12:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 02/09/13 11:01, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo ,
escribió:

It does seem I'm not missing the obvious, anyway - I wonder why they
are so hard
to come by, compared with other types of cable reel?
I can think of a few reasons:

* putting Cat5 on a reel would make it more liable to kink as it is
wound and unwound. Kinking Cat5 cable is a no-no; it can have a serious
adverse impact on performance.

* it would need to be stranded cable. Solid cable would (eventually)
fracture. Stranded cable is only intended to be used for patch leads of
short length (up to 5m ish) between e.g. the wall outlet and the device.

* a partly-uncoiled reel might be more prone to picking up external
interference as the loops form an antenna

* the rated length on an 100mbps ethernet link is no more than about
10m which is scarcely worth putting on a reel

Huh?

Huh indeed, and I'm also having trouble excepting Mike's assertion
that kinking UTP seriously affects performance. I know it's a view
that's widely held, but I have never fount it to be a problem unless
the conductors or their insulation are damaged.

Unlike thin net and coax in general.

After all, however well made, each termination to a patch panel or
faceplate is going to effectively be a kink

--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

En el artículo , Graham.
escribió:

Huh indeed, and I'm also having trouble excepting

accepting

Mike's assertion
that kinking UTP seriously affects performance.

plenty of evidence on Google if you can work out how to use it,
including from people who know what they're talking about, like Belden,
who make the cable.

Kinks cause reflections in the cable - too many and you WILL impact
performance. Might work OK at 10/100 but fail at gigabit, for example.

I know it's a view
that's widely held, but I have never fount it to be a problem unless
the conductors or their insulation are damaged.

Well, that marks you out as a cowboy installer then, doesn't it?

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

Mike Tomlinson :
Kinks cause reflections in the cable - too many and you WILL impact
performance. Might work OK at 10/100 but fail at gigabit, for example.

What I've never been sure of is whether failure is likely to result if a
patch cable is stored kinked and then unkinked before use.

--
Mike Barnes

En el artículo , Mike
Barnes escribió:

What I've never been sure of is whether failure is likely to result if a
patch cable is stored kinked and then unkinked before use.

It's hard to tell whether you've successfully unkinked the cores because
the loose outer insulation on some cables disguises problems, so
although the insulation might look ok, the cores inside may not be. The
only way to be sure is to use a proper tester (= $$$). If a patch cable
looks ratty, the retaining clips are broken off, or it shows signs of
abuse (having been kinked, walked on, run over, etc.) I bin it and
replace - they're dirt cheap.

When I did building Cat5/6 flood installs of solid cable for a cable
installation firm, any cable that got kinked badly during install was
replaced immediately. Fluke testing them before replacement usually
resulted in a failure. If the cable had only been lightly kinked and
passed testing, we left it in situ.

This is why it's worth getting the pros in to do data cable
installations rather than leaving it to the sparkies or so-called "IT
pros".

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On Fri, 6 Sep 2013 05:25:55 +0100, Mike Tomlinson
wrote:

En el artículo , Graham.
escribió:

Huh indeed, and I'm also having trouble excepting

accepting

Mike's assertion
that kinking UTP seriously affects performance.

plenty of evidence on Google if you can work out how to use it,
including from people who know what they're talking about, like Belden,
who make the cable.

Kinks cause reflections in the cable - too many and you WILL impact
performance. Might work OK at 10/100 but fail at gigabit, for example.

I know it's a view
that's widely held, but I have never fount it to be a problem unless
the conductors or their insulation are damaged.

Well, that marks you out as a cowboy installer then, doesn't it?

Now that's unbecoming of you. I wanted to provoke a technical
argument, not a personal one and in any case I am not involved with
cable installation on a regular basis, and I have respect for those
that are.

Of course you are correct about not kinking *any* cable and observing
minimum radius of curvature, what I am saying is that kinks in UTP
'per se' will cause no practical ill effect to the signals, unlike
coax based systems.

Clearly, kinks are the most likely areas for failure open circuit of,
or short circuit between the conductors, or rupture of the sheath
causing water ingress and leakage.

So I would have no qualms about using a =100m temporary patch cable
on a reel however many kinks and twists are in it.

My position remains that whilst kinks can promote failure, they do not
of themselves cause problems, unlike squashed coax dialectic.



--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

On Friday, 6 September 2013 08:04:52 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

This is why it's worth getting the pros in to do data cable

installations rather than leaving it to the sparkies or so-called "IT

pros".

A friend of mine decided to make his own patch cable, thoght he did a good job but found he had far more 'collisions' then expected. The cause was that while he'd wired it up correctly he';d swapped teh colours over resulting in the pairs being re-twisted I think. Whenn tested he got around 3o-50% collisons which appeard to reduce the overall speed of the cable.

Thre's a fine line bewteen being a bit kinked and being twisted ask Jimmy savile ;-)

On 06/09/2013 14:00, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 6 September 2013 08:04:52 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

This is why it's worth getting the pros in to do data cable

installations rather than leaving it to the sparkies or so-called
"IT

pros".

A friend of mine decided to make his own patch cable, thoght he did a
good job but found he had far more 'collisions' then expected. The
cause was that while he'd wired it up correctly he';d swapped teh
colours over resulting in the pairs being re-twisted I think. Whenn
tested he got around 3o-50% collisons which appeard to reduce the
overall speed of the cable.



You mean he made a twisted pair cable into a none twisted pair cable.
It goes to show how resilient ethernet is when it still works over the
wrong cables.

Its why you need to test it properly as the actual software will still
work but it may not get the best out of the network.

On 06/09/2013 05:25, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , Graham.
escribió:

Huh indeed, and I'm also having trouble excepting

accepting

Mike's assertion
that kinking UTP seriously affects performance.

plenty of evidence on Google if you can work out how to use it,
including from people who know what they're talking about, like Belden,
who make the cable.

Kinks cause reflections in the cable - too many and you WILL impact
performance. Might work OK at 10/100 but fail at gigabit, for example.

IME you need a fairly severe kink to actually cause a problem, and the
problem is usually loss of comms altogether rather than a reduction in
performance.

I know it's a view
that's widely held, but I have never fount it to be a problem unless
the conductors or their insulation are damaged.

Well, that marks you out as a cowboy installer then, doesn't it?

More milk tibbles?


--
Cheers,

John.

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

En el artículo , John
Rumm escribió:

IME you need a fairly severe kink to actually cause a problem, and the
problem is usually loss of comms altogether rather than a reduction in
performance.

I'm afraid you're totally wrong. Try googling the subject to find out
more from those who actually know what they are talking about.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On 07/09/2013 06:46, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , John
Rumm escribió:

IME you need a fairly severe kink to actually cause a problem, and the
problem is usually loss of comms altogether rather than a reduction in
performance.

I'm afraid you're totally wrong.

I will make allowance since perhaps you have poor comprehension skills.

You will note that I said IME (that's "In My Experience"). Since I was
describing my experience, its not something you can dismiss as "wrong"
since its simply a recounting of fact.

I did not claim that a kink could not result in a performance reduction
and indeed if you actually thought about it before throwing your toys
out of the pram you would realise that a failure to work at all, is in
fact a significant drop in performance.

Obviously if you distort the physical geometry of a twisted pair then
you will introduce impedance discontinuities within the cable that will
cause signal reflections. It does not take many unwanted reflections to
knacker access on a CSMA/CD system, or to increase the frame error rate.
Twisted pair cable is far more resilient to the effects of kinking /
crushing etc than say co-ax, but its not immune.

Now this is an anecdotal sample of one, and I fully accept that its not
a statistically significant sample - it may be that I just don't meet
that many cables kinked in a way that causes non catastrophic
performance degradation. On almost all occasions I have encountered
problems resulting from cable damage, it has manifested in either
failure to communicate at all, or possibly a failure to operate in the
expected mode (i.e. gigabit / full duplex etc). Its possible that some
of the non critical failures will go unnoticed - since not all
environments will have managed switches able to report error rates, or
be tested with equipment able to perform that level of analysis.

Try googling the subject to find out
more from those who actually know what they are talking about.

Try to stop being such a prick, and we might pay more attention to you.



--
Cheers,

John.

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