Does anyone know why it is not possible to buy these? I can buy all
types of HDMI and D type male/female adaptors but not RJ45. I did find
some a couple of years ago I think, but they were unbelievably bulky and
expensive. Please don't suggest right angled cables as they use up too
much space.

In article , Capitol
writes
Does anyone know why it is not possible to buy these? I can buy all
types of HDMI and D type male/female adaptors but not RJ45. I did find
some a couple of years ago I think, but they were unbelievably bulky and
expensive. Please don't suggest right angled cables as they use up too
much space.

Understand your wish to find the R/A conn but haven't seen them.

Looking at how the dims of connectors and shrouds would build up I can't
see how it would be less than that an unbooted RJ45 conn followed but a
tight bend which is how I worked it for a floor box installation with
poor clearance.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

En el artículo ,
Capitol escribió:

Does anyone know why it is not possible to buy these?

Probably because it would exceed the minimum bend radius of the cable,
having an adverse effect on signal integrity.

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

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo1eGdnQ3hTNvRYnHPnZ2dnUVZ8tGdnZ2d@brightvi ew.co.uk,
escribió:

Does anyone know why it is not possible to buy these?

Probably because it would exceed the minimum bend radius of the cable,
having an adverse effect on signal integrity.

There would be no cable in an adaptor.

En el artículo ,
Capitol escribió:


There would be no cable in an adaptor.

*sigh* Pedant alert.

It's still a sharp bend exceeding the minimum radius of the conductors.

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

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el ,
escribió:


There would be no cable in an adaptor.

*sigh* Pedant alert.

It's still a sharp bend exceeding the minimum radius of the conductors.


Since when can't you bend a piece of conducting metal through 90
degrees. once again, this is an adaptor! NO CABLE!

Capitol wrote:

Mike Tomlinson wrote:

*sigh* Pedant alert.

It's still a sharp bend exceeding the minimum radius of the conductors.

Since when can't you bend a piece of conducting metal through 90 degrees.
once again, this is an adaptor! NO CABLE!

Yeah. Mike, think about the way a LAN socket is soldered into a circuit
board. The angle between a pin going into the board and the track it goes
into will be 90 degrees, and it happens in a fraction of a millimeter.

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to replacing "aaa" by "284".

In article ,
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo ,
Capitol escribió:


There would be no cable in an adaptor.

*sigh* Pedant alert.

It's still a sharp bend exceeding the minimum radius of the conductors.

Surely the problem would be the insulation/spacing rather than the
conductor itself?

--
*You are validating my inherent mistrust of strangers

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
In article ,
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artÃ*culo ,
Capitol escribió:


There would be no cable in an adaptor.

*sigh* Pedant alert.

It's still a sharp bend exceeding the minimum radius of the conductors.

Surely the problem would be the insulation/spacing rather than the
conductor itself?

It's the characteristic impedance, which depends on:
The cross sectional geometry of the conductors
The distance from ground plane(s) (if any)
The permittivity of the medium (PCB, PVC, air)

AIUI the bend radius of cat5/6/etc is governed by the twists in the twisted
pair becoming unbalanced, and the conductor becoming deformed, rather than
the signal not liking the bend. The rule of thumb that I go by is that the
bend radius starts becoming an issue on a PCB above about 20GHz - which
isn't far off the harmonics of a 10Gbps pair (eg the track to an SFP+ cage
on a 10gig NIC), but nowhere near the 100MHz plus harmonics of a gigabit
ethernet signal. On a PCB you have much more control over conductor
geometry than bending of random wires.

Theo