Running Cat5e cable underground

Well, the time has finally come to shift most of the computers out into the garage (apparently). Having already got enough power out there I need to put in a fat data pipe to connect the lot to the house switch - cat5e will do nicely because I have lots. Wireless is an absolute worst case scenario both for speed and price and we need to connect to the servers for data (video/music etc).
The garage is not connected to the house and is separated by about 3m of paving/drive/whatnot.
Any suggestions for running the cable ? I'm aware that pushing it through the same conduit as the power is a no-go and I really don't want to dig up the drive unless I have to. I suppose I could take it under a patio and through some of the lawn if I must. On top of that I naturally don't want to spend very much time or effort.
Chips.
--
-----------
Chips'll make it better.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Anything wrong with wireless?
--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Guy King wrote:

Other than the OP says he doesn't want it - worst case (cost / bandwidth).
...
on the other hand, I can stream 720p HD to the XBox-360 on 802.11g
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, it's not /that/ expensive, and some systems do vast bandwidths these days.
--
Skipweasel
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So how much is a wireless link that goes as fast as Gigabit ethernet? Gigabit routers are now quite cheap (I bought my 8 port one for about 70) and many motherboards have Gigabit NICs built in.
--
Chris Green


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chips wrote :

Catenary wire supporting a length of 20mm plastic conduit?
--

Regards,
Harry (M1BYT) (L)
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Chips" wrote...

How about a pair of fibre media convertors and a short run of multimode fibre in the conduit with the power? Even figure-8 patch cord will do for this short a distance.
You get: 1) Noise immunity as the power won't interfere with the light; 2) Electrical isolation; 3) Lightning protection; 4) A Very Cool Thing to brag about ;o)
They're available in 10M, 100M and 1Gbit versions, depending on how fat a pipe you want... prices depend on whether you scour Ebay/IT surplus outlets etc. or buy new (ouch!), but start around 25 each if you're lucky.
BTW, cat5e cable isn't specified for immersion or wet environments, and can/will be permeable to groundwater, resulting in Horrible Corrosion and Degradation and eventual loss of its signal-carrying abilities, so don't bury it :o(
Dave H. (The engineer formerly known as Homeless) (...who has a pair of fibre-connected Ethernet switches to get to his garage - geek, eh?)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

.......

.......
Whatever you end up doing (personally I'd go with an optical solution), I would suggest you run some redundant circuits, either down the same conduit or in a parallel channel. It's easier to do this now all in one go than to have to start digging up the garden if you get a failure in the future.
Oh yes, don't forget to label the corresponding ends with a permanent marker :-)
Pete
--
..........................................................................
. never trust a man who, when left alone ...... Pete Lynch .
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The pukka outdoor grade stuff will stand all thats sort of misuse. Bin there buried it.. in rather damp ducts!...

--
Tony Sayer


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I know that Comms wiring practise does not recc. for running copper comms between buildings due to risk of electrical faults, lightning strikes etc. The approved way is fibre (as mentioned)
Why not use WiFi 802.11g will give you 54Mbs or up top 100 Mb if you use HSM compatible devices.
or go nuts and use pre-N
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Osprey wrote:

Ah. Thats prolly why my comms here is over 2 miles of copper..underground.

Cos its crap?
Fibre is the best answer. To this particular set of specs.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
You missed the point ... the exchange running copper to you is one thing, it's earthed at a single point. If you run copper comms from your house to an out building there is a proscribed risk due to linking of earth paths in the event of the mains losing it's earth ... or in event of lightning strike.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Well proven even before WWII: even buried wires suffer from direct lightning strikes like overhead cables. Even before WWII, both underground and overhead wires were properly earthed when entering a building - and therefore damage from lightning was routinely averted. Technology is that old and that well proven. An October 1960 paper in Bell System Technical Journal from Bodle and Gresh desribes standard protection. Their question was whether buried and overhead wire protection - generations standard even before 1960 - was sufficient for semiconductors:

Those who never learned basic protection techniqes then recommend expensive solutions such as fiber optics.
Any connection between buildings - as has been standard practices for most of the past 100 years - enters and earths all utility and communication wires at a common service entrance. Makes little difference if wire is 2km above or below earth. It still requires well proven and standard protection.
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 30 May 2006 02:20:54 -0700 someone who may be "w_tom"

Those who never learned basic wiring practices then recommend potentially dangerous "solutions" such as earthing communications cables. This exposes the communications cable and those in contact with it to all sorts of dangers.
There is a difference between functional earths and protective conductors, which is why the cables concerned are identified by different colours. I mention this in case anyone is foolish enough to believe what you typed and act on it. They should instead understand the difference, contact the owner of the cable and follow BS 7671.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Everything as posted conforms to both BS7671 and BS6651. If David really had a problem with what was posted, then he would have defined specific problems. He did not. He just posted BS numbers with no reference to what creates dangers.
Accurately noted and specifically defined by BS6651:

Earthing is essential to transient protection and also necessary to protect occupants in one building from electrical failures in another building. Communication cables must be earthed at the service entrance as even defined by BS6651 to protect electronics within that building AND to protect human life. Protective conductors also make a same earthing connection for human safety.
David Hansen wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 31 May 2006 02:04:03 -0700 someone who may be "w_tom"
Nice jargon, but meaningless without further explanation.

In situations such as PME protection from failures outside the building is particularly important. Avoiding excessive currents on telecommunications cables under PME fault conditions is one of the reasons why one needs to use one's brain.
As I said, there is a difference between functional earths and protective conductors, which is why the cables concerned are identified by different colours.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
David Hansen wrote:

Electronics protection is earth ground. Protectors are devices that temporarily connect each wire (inside a cable) to earth. Protectors are, well, an industry professional says it clearly: http://www.telebyteusa.com/primer/ch6.htm

No earth ground means no effective protection. 'Path of least impedance' means an earthing connection should be a less than 3 meter connection. All incoming wires must connect to a 'single point' ground. No earthing means ineffective protection. Every incoming wire even in that 1960 Bell System Technical Journal (a concept that well understood even long before 1960) makes an earthing connection where wire enters a building. Earth ground - not a protector - is protection. Earthing is essential to transient protection (as demonstrated by British Standard 6651) as well as to protect occupants in one building from electrical failures in another building. Defined are transistor safety and human safety functions of earthing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
w_tom wrote:

The problem is that your average d-i-yer, who can put up a set of shelves, is actively discouraged by Part P from gaining any understanding of electrical installations, and as a result, is unlikely even to be aware of the need for earthing of data communications cables, let alone how to do it properly. At least using fiber-optic cables is fail safe (electrically), and not especially expensive. Think of the extra cost as being an insurance premium against ignorance. Personally, I too would favour the use of fibre-optic - always remembering not to look into the laser with the remaining eye.
Sid
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
There is a mail order company called Tait Components who do external cat5 or you could use 2x dlink wireless bridges DWL-2000AP+ with a couple of external arials. using the fibre with dlink fibre media converters would also work. Running the fibre, might find it difficult getting through the conduit where your power cable is.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

My solution to running telephone, data and an air line between two buildings a couple of metres apart was a piece of 100mm square 6mm wall steel tube 3m above ground.
Colin Bignell
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.