Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply and
also possible interference.

Any advice welcomed.

Dave




----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply
and also possible interference.

Regardless of the regulations it is bad practice to run telephone cables in
the same duct or conduit as power cables because of the possibility of
interference. If you are going to use the telephone for data then make sure
you use decent cable to the proper CW1308 spec.

Dave wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply and
also possible interference.

As a Regs matter, you're not supposed to run it in the same compartment
of trunking or similar extended-close-proximity as mains cable, nor
through the same joist-holes, and so on; separation of at least 2 inches
is considered a Good Idea. Crossing at 90 degrees (or near offer) is not
a problem - the OSG opines that "where LV and telecoms circuits are
obliged to cross, additional insulation should be provided at the
crossing point", generously conceding that this is not necessary if
either cable is armoured. So if you want to be utterly compliant, you
could play with add-on sleeving, taping on a scrap of plastic conduit,
or whatever else is to hand and consistent with Good Workmanship; but
frankly, you're not protecting against anything useful by doing so in
halfway normal circumstances.

TEDIOUS KEEP-USENET-USEFUL INTERRUPTION:
while I'm happy for this message to be sent around Usenet and archived
in the normal way, being the copyright holder I specifically REFUSE
permission for its inclusion in derivative works such as those being
operated at www.diyprojects.info
END OF TEDIOUS KEEP-USENET-USEFUL INTERRUPTION

As a matter of good sense, running mains and phone cable next to each
other for a long run is likely to cause you some interference, both
continuous hum and the odd crackle as thermostats or similar switch on
and off. Such interference won't help your modem or ADSL connection be
error-free, though it'll merely affect performance as the glitchy bits
will end up being retransmitted.

HTH - Stefek

In article ,
Dave wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can
I run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to
Mains electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may
apply and also possible interference.

Apart from any possible safety issues, running an audio cable parallel to
and in close proximity to mains is very bad practice - there's a very real
chance of interference on the audio circuit.

--
*If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?

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

TEDIOUS KEEP-USENET-USEFUL INTERRUPTION:
while I'm happy for this message to be sent around Usenet and archived
in the normal way, being the copyright holder I specifically REFUSE
permission for its inclusion in derivative works such as those being
operated at www.diyprojects.info
END OF TEDIOUS KEEP-USENET-USEFUL INTERRUPTION


Stefek,

Your post has made it to the website in question already....

Alan.

Peter Crosland wrote:

Regardless of the regulations it is bad practice to run telephone cables in
the same duct or conduit as power cables because of the possibility of
interference. If you are going to use the telephone for data then make sure
you use decent cable to the proper CW1308 spec.

Or even better, Cat5e ;-)

--
Grunff

In article , Dave wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply and
also possible interference.

Any advice welcomed.

Get DECT cordless phones and forget about the wiring...

Gordon

"Gordon Henderson" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave
wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply
and
also possible interference.

Any advice welcomed.

Get DECT cordless phones and forget about the wiring...

Gordon

You're dead right - best things we ever bought. The only problem sometimes
is finding the things! They come with other advantages too - you can have
one in your pocket when gardening; if your Mum phones and wants a natter,
you can carry on watching TV/Web Browsing/etc.; you don't have to get up
from the dinner table; etc. etc.

Peter.

In message , Snowman
writes

"Gordon Henderson" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave
wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply
and
also possible interference.

Any advice welcomed.

Get DECT cordless phones and forget about the wiring...

Gordon

You're dead right - best things we ever bought.

I still like a couple of wired phones in the house - up and downstairs
for reliable emergency use - and I always know where they are.....

--
Chris French, Leeds

(Gordon Henderson) wrote in message ...
In article , Dave wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply and
also possible interference.

Any advice welcomed.

Get DECT cordless phones and forget about the wiring...

Gordon

I've already wired around the house but do use DECT phones. However
they are not without their own problems as they interfere with my A/V
equipment. God knows what is going to happen when every street is full
of wireless CCTV, wireless alarms, remote video senders, wi-fi,
bluetooth etc.

"Snowman" wrote in message
...

"Gordon Henderson" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave
wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can
I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply
and
also possible interference.

Any advice welcomed.

Get DECT cordless phones and forget about the wiring...

Gordon

You're dead right - best things we ever bought. The only problem sometimes
is finding the things!

You usually press a button on the base unit and it bleeps, then you hunt the
bleep.

They come with other advantages too - you can have
one in your pocket when gardening; if your Mum phones and wants a natter,
you can carry on watching TV/Web Browsing/etc.; you don't have to get up
from the dinner table; etc. etc.

Peter.

"IMM" wrote in message
...


You usually press a button on the base unit and it bleeps, then you hunt
the
bleep.

Oh wow - that's what that's for! :-)

"StealthUK" wrote in message
om...
(Gordon Henderson) wrote in message
...
In article , Dave
wrote:
Putting telephone outlets in a number of rooms thoughout the house. Can
I
run the telephone cabling which links these outlets right next to Mains
electric cabling? Thinking here about any rules and regs that may apply
and
also possible interference.

Any advice welcomed.

Get DECT cordless phones and forget about the wiring...

Gordon

I've already wired around the house but do use DECT phones. However
they are not without their own problems as they interfere with my A/V
equipment. God knows what is going to happen when every street is full
of wireless CCTV, wireless alarms, remote video senders, wi-fi,
bluetooth etc.

And they intefere with hearing aids, so not a good choice if there are
hearing aid users in the house!

Andy

In message , Grunff
writes
Peter Crosland wrote:

Regardless of the regulations it is bad practice to run telephone
cables in the same duct or conduit as power cables because of the
possibility of interference. If you are going to use the telephone
for data then make sure you use decent cable to the proper CW1308 spec.

Or even better, Cat5e ;-)

Probably depends on what 'data' means, I tried wiring an Ethernet
connection with cable marked as CW1308, and couldn't get it to run above
10Mbit/s, some NICs wouldn't work at all with CW1308 cable, that's with
just 5m runs. Seems the CW1308 cable had no twists in it.

--
bof at bof dot me dot uk
currently being spammed at a rate of 5486 a day

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:32:18 +0100, bof wrote:

Seems the CW1308 cable had no twists in it.

In that case it wasn't CW1308, perhaps CW1311 (the flat D profile
stuff)...

The major difference between CW1308 and Cat5 is the number of twists
per unit length. Cat5 has a much tighter twist.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

In article om, Dave
Liquorice writes
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:32:18 +0100, bof wrote:

Seems the CW1308 cable had no twists in it.

In that case it wasn't CW1308, perhaps CW1311 (the flat D profile
stuff)...

The major difference between CW1308 and Cat5 is the number of twists
per unit length. Cat5 has a much tighter twist.

In fact if you take a bit apart sometime you'll see that each pair has a
differing twist rate, some are more twisted than others

Keeps crosstalk down.....
--
Tony Sayer

I would make sure what type of Telephone company main boxes I have. To see
how you will extend them.

E.G I have one B.T box which is a simple design - square shape with socket
in the middle (same as those you buy in all teh shops) this I could only
extend by getting an extension kit i.e. a cable with the plug already on.
This means that the main box you extend cannot be used anymore unless you by
a 2 into one adaptor. Still won't look nice. I luckily found a master box in
a skip (see below)


The cable company in my area installed a master box, this is bigger than the
standard box with the socket at the bottom. This bottom bit with the socket
comes off (2 screws) and behind it you can feed in your extension cable -
NOW this can be any type you want and you connect without the need for a
plug. So you screw back the part with the socket in it and you can still use
the socket and you extension wire is completely hidden.

I extended my system so in some places I hadcables runnign near power, here
I wrapped them in tin foiland feed them through waste pipe (was lying
around).




"Dave Liquorice" wrote in message
ll.com...
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:32:18 +0100, bof wrote:

Seems the CW1308 cable had no twists in it.

In that case it wasn't CW1308, perhaps CW1311 (the flat D profile
stuff)...

The major difference between CW1308 and Cat5 is the number of twists
per unit length. Cat5 has a much tighter twist.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 24/08/2004

In article ,
Yitzak wrote:
E.G I have one B.T box which is a simple design - square shape with
socket in the middle (same as those you buy in all teh shops) this I
could only extend by getting an extension kit i.e. a cable with the plug
already on. This means that the main box you extend cannot be used
anymore unless you by a 2 into one adaptor.

I presume you mean because it uses insulation piercing connectors rather
than screw ones? These will happily accept 3 wires per terminal, but you
need (in theory) a special tool to insert the wires. A cheap version of
this is supplied with many sockets. But the real thing isn't vastly
expensive - well under a tenner from the likes of TLC.

--
*Certain frogs can be frozen solid, then thawed, and survive *

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

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:35:57 +0100, tony sayer wrote:

The major difference between CW1308 and Cat5 is the number of
twists per unit length. Cat5 has a much tighter twist.

In fact if you take a bit apart sometime you'll see that each pair
has a differing twist rate, some are more twisted than others

This is true and had slipped my mind, either way even the loosest Cat5
pair has a higher twist rate than CW1308 which uses the same rate in
each pair.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++
This article was posted to usenet, the information in it may
not be published in, or used by, http://www.diyprojects.info
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++

In usenet article , "Dave Plowman
(News)" wrote:

In article ,
Yitzak wrote:
E.G I have one B.T box which is a simple design - square shape with
socket in the middle (same as those you buy in all teh shops) this I
could only extend by getting an extension kit i.e. a cable with the plug
already on. This means that the main box you extend cannot be used
anymore unless you by a 2 into one adaptor.

I presume you mean because it uses insulation piercing connectors rather
than screw ones? These will happily accept 3 wires per terminal, but you
need (in theory) a special tool to insert the wires. A cheap version of
this is supplied with many sockets. But the real thing isn't vastly
expensive - well under a tenner from the likes of TLC.

Yitzak referred to a single (old style) BT supplied box. I expect it's
more a case of being prohibited from making direct connections to the
terminals _inside_ BT's main box.

With the newer NTE5 boxes you can connect inside the removable bit but
are still prohibited from connecting to the terminals in the back of the
main body of the box.

--
Mike Clarke

The newer ones are much easier, because there are terminals specially for
extensions as you said remove the socket part feed your wire in.

You don't have to touch the telephone's company wires, well infact you do to
remove the box to feed your extension wire in but just don't tell them.

I couldn't find oen of these new boxes I thought only the telephone cos had
them. Luckily I found one in a skip.


"Mike Clarke" wrote in message
...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++
This article was posted to usenet, the information in it may
not be published in, or used by, http://www.diyprojects.info
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ +++++++++++

In usenet article , "Dave Plowman
(News)" wrote:

In article ,
Yitzak wrote:
E.G I have one B.T box which is a simple design - square shape with
socket in the middle (same as those you buy in all teh shops) this I
could only extend by getting an extension kit i.e. a cable with the
plug
already on. This means that the main box you extend cannot be used
anymore unless you by a 2 into one adaptor.

I presume you mean because it uses insulation piercing connectors rather
than screw ones? These will happily accept 3 wires per terminal, but you
need (in theory) a special tool to insert the wires. A cheap version of
this is supplied with many sockets. But the real thing isn't vastly
expensive - well under a tenner from the likes of TLC.

Yitzak referred to a single (old style) BT supplied box. I expect it's
more a case of being prohibited from making direct connections to the
terminals _inside_ BT's main box.

With the newer NTE5 boxes you can connect inside the removable bit but
are still prohibited from connecting to the terminals in the back of the
main body of the box.

--
Mike Clarke


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.744 / Virus Database: 496 - Release Date: 24/08/2004

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:20:50 GMT, Yitzak wrote:

You don't have to touch the telephone's company wires, well infact
you do to remove the box to feed your extension wire in but just
don't tell them.

There is a knock out in the centre of the detachable front panel, but
I have never seen it used...

I couldn't find oen of these new boxes I thought only the telephone
cos had them. Luckily I found one in a skip.

You won't find them in DIY sheds but most electrical/electronic places
have 'em. CPC, RS etc.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

In message om, Dave
Liquorice writes
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:32:18 +0100, bof wrote:

Seems the CW1308 cable had no twists in it.

In that case it wasn't CW1308, perhaps CW1311 (the flat D profile
stuff)...

Well it's got CW1308 printed on the label on the reel, after stripping
back about a metre there were no twists evident

--
bof at bof dot me dot uk
currently being spammed at a rate of 5613 a day

On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:33:56 +0100, bof wrote:

Well it's got CW1308 printed on the label on the reel, after
stripping back about a metre there were no twists evident

The label is lying or you have a very badly manufactured reel. What
colours are the cores?

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

In message om, Dave
Liquorice writes
The major difference between CW1308 and Cat5 is the number of twists
per unit length. Cat5 has a much tighter twist.

Is there a spec for CW1308 twisting? A few years back after discovering
the reel of CW1308 I had was untwisted, or at best extremely lightly
twisted, I tried to find a spec but couldn't.


--
bof at bof dot me dot uk
currently being spammed at a rate of 4761 a day, that's 1738955 spams a year.

On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:45:43 +0100, bof wrote:

Is there a spec for CW1308 twisting?

There must be, www.bt.com denies any knowledge of "cw1308", stupid
marketing puff, nothing the BT SINs. Google doesn't produce much
uselful information either.

A few years back after discovering the reel of CW1308 I had was
untwisted, or at best extremely lightly twisted, I tried to find a
spec but couldn't.

I've just had a dig about and can't find anything directly relating to
CW1308 but that cable appears to be pretty much Cat3 (or not...). This
is an interesting read:

http://hardware.mcse.ms/archive102-2004-6-13037.html

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

In message om, Dave
Liquorice writes
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:33:56 +0100, bof wrote:

Well it's got CW1308 printed on the label on the reel, after
stripping back about a metre there were no twists evident

The label is lying or you have a very badly manufactured reel. What
colours are the cores?

Having just found the spool they are
orange/white, white/orange, blue/white, white/blue

I just stripped back 2m and no twists evident.


--
bof at bof dot me dot uk
currently being spammed at a rate of 4342 a day, that's 1585916 spams a year.

In article ,
bof wrote:
Having just found the spool they are
orange/white, white/orange, blue/white, white/blue

Can't see that being anything other than UK telephone cable.

I just stripped back 2m and no twists evident.

The twists on older telephone cable are pretty gentle. I've got some 10
pair stuff where 5 use red as one colour, 5 white. And then 5 colours to
identify the others, but obviously related to the red or white other.
And you've got to be careful to pick the correct pair - I usually strip
back about 1 metre to make sure.

--
*What was the best thing before sliced bread?

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

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
bof wrote:
Having just found the spool they are
orange/white, white/orange, blue/white, white/blue

Can't see that being anything other than UK telephone cable.

Well that's what I originally bought it for, but it's definitely marked
as being CW1308.


I just stripped back 2m and no twists evident.

The twists on older telephone cable are pretty gentle. I've got some 10
pair stuff where 5 use red as one colour, 5 white. And then 5 colours to
identify the others, but obviously related to the red or white other.
And you've got to be careful to pick the correct pair - I usually strip
back about 1 metre to make sure.

On a not entirely unrelated note, the old GPO cable used to have paper
insulation, the pairs were identified by having sets of 1, 2, 3 or 4
printed rings, the 4 rings were printed 4 times further apart than the 1
rings to keep the cable capacitance equal.


--
bof at bof dot me dot uk
currently being spammed at a rate of 4423 a day, that's 1615501 spams a year.

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:27:40 +0100, bof wrote:

The label is lying or you have a very badly manufactured reel. What
colours are the cores?

Having just found the spool they are orange/white, white/orange,
blue/white, white/blue

CW1308 colours rather than "alarm" cable colours (black, red, white,
green, yellow, blue...) which isn't twisted and normally stranded
rather than solid.

I just stripped back 2m and no twists evident.

Wanders off to my drum of CW1308...

The pairs are twisted around each other at about 1 twist per 7" and
each pair roughly one twist every 2.5".

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail