CoAx and CAT5 UTP

[J.]

If I had these 2 cables riunning along side each other in trunking would it cause any probs!! I know you can't put cat5 next to a power cable - !!!

Cheers

DIY Clueless!!

[J.]

oops - one other thing - cna I get a signal for my TV & radio down the one cable and put a splitter on the end!!

DIY Clueless!!

J

[J.]

oops - one other thing - cna I get a signal for my TV & radio down the one cable and put a splitter on the end!!

DIY Clueless!!

J

[Andy Hall]

I can vouch for it being fine if you use CT100 cable as the co-ax.

This is very well screened satellite grade cable and recommended for any form of home antenna and other TV distribution.

Whether cheap TV coax would be OK, I don't know, but I would recommend against its use anyway, CAT5 or not

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[usenet]

It's very unlikely to cause problems unless you have huge lengths running next to each other. In fact I think one could safely say 'no'.

That's more down to IEE (safety) regulations than interference problems though long runs close to mains wiring might encounter problems.

[usenet]

Yes.

Depending on how good the signals are you will need more or less filtering and separation circuitry at the ends. I'd just try it with simple splitters and see if it's OK, if it's not OK then try cleverer circuitry.

[Andy Hall]

Yes.

You need a distribution amplifier that has inputs for UHF antenna and for VHF antenna.

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[J.]

Thanks..

Any good online shops I can purchase this stuff ?

J

[Andy Hall]

CB0228166 for the coax......

.andy

To email, substitute .nospam with .gl

[The Natural Philosopher]

No. Unless you do something utterly weird with one or other of them.

You can....

[The Natural Philosopher]

Yes. Use muxing booster., No need to demux unless super critical. Just split.

[The Natural Philosopher]

google on 'labgear'......

[Rick Dipper]

You can run CAT5 virtually anywhere. MRI scanners cause problems, but then they are like the magnets on cartoons, but for real.

CAT5 cable is twisted in pairs, the external effect on one half of the pair, is supposed to be equal and opposite to the effect on the other side.

Rick

[Rick Dipper]

Most computer rooms have MILES of the stuff tied together in huge bundles. It all tends to be under the floor with the power, air con, fire suppression, fibre cable etc ete .....

There are maximum lengths on each cable run, witch are designed so that the loss of signal is not so high that you can not read the signal. There are also issues with maximum propogation delay (speed of electricity to you and I) if the cables are too long. The rules get more strict as you run your data faster

10Meg 100Meg or 1000Meg

If you are overrunning your cable lengths, then you need to move to fibre, which has a problem of the speed of light being too slow.

If you are simply doing your house, you are unlikley to run into probelms, unless you compete with the Queen for best house in the country.

Rick

[Fishter]

which has a problem of the speed of light being too slow.

Being new to the practical installation of data cables and such like, would you care to explain the above statement?

I know there is a speed/distance trade off in copper (over relatively short distances), but wasn't aware of any such restrictions in fibre until you get to Gbps linerates.

[Wdyw]

Cat5 is good for 200-250m.

[Zymurgy]

The Natural Philosopher wrote

Indeed, of course you can run them parallel to each other. The CAT 5 pairs are designed to reject induced interference as the interference affects both pairs simultaneously. It's not to say that an extended run won't affect data throughput though. The terminations need to be good though, and the twists need to go right up to the connector.

There's bound to be some CAT5 specs out there if you google for them.

I used Cat5e in my home network. I believe this is better quality than std Cat5.

Have a word with the guys in comp.dcom.cabling, I went there a few weeks ago for some advice and they were superb.

Cheers,

Paul.

[The Natural Philosopher]

all tends to be under the floor with the power, air con, fire suppression,

loss of signal is not so high that you can not read the signal. There are also

the cables are too long. The rules get more strict as you run your data faster

That is so, but that normally relates to CDMSA on un switched ethernet - the losses are not so high that overunning on length affects signal level - its just that the colision detection algorithms break down when long delays happen.

If you use a switch, that problem doesn't occur, and since switches are pretty much hub prices today anywy, thats the way to go.

which has a problem of the speed of light being too slow.

Huh? Not sure what you are driving at there...

unless you compete with the Queen for best house in the country.

Its easy to run over 100Mbps supposed limits (30 meters from memory). If you run a switch tho experience suggests it doesn't matter.

Not tried gigabit stuiff, so can't comment.

>

[The Natural Philosopher]

which has a problem of the speed of light being too slow.

Wwell I wouldn't care too, since fiber cable is only marginally slower than line of sight microwave, and is about as good as it gets.

Attenuation tends to be teh problem in cvheap fobre optics, and wave shape 'smearing' due to different speeds of propagation of varuous colors.

Typically multimode fiber is good for 300meters guaranteed, and typical monomode can be over 3km. If done properly with high power, a lot more than that.

[The Natural Philosopher]

At 10m.

Its rated at 30m at 100Mbps. BUT that is a delay, not attenutaion, issue. I have done 10MBPs between *switches* over 100m.