560 foot run needed

[bobdole369]

Can't cut the ground it's leased property, Cost is a big issue - so no FMC's thus no fiber. I need a way to get at least 30mbits over to a satellite office. Also not using Wireless.

I heard coax stuff exists... Any ideas?

bb-elec.com makes a $600/pair device to run over flat phone wiring. I really don't want to put a switch halfway across that I would need to run PoE to, or another power wire. Also has anyone actually used a repeater this decade? They don't seem to make them anymore.

 

[ScottMac]

Just curious; What are you going to do if you can't find a device to do this within your budget? Does the project hit the can, or does the budget go up to reflect a more realistic, safe, reliable approach?

Why is copper ok, but fiber (best) or wireless (next best) isn't?

Regarding your $600/pr devices ... they are almost certainly proprietary signaling ... putting a switch in won't work, they're not Ethernet. So, unless they have their own flavor of repeater, forget that as an option.

 

[imagoon]

Personally this confuses me, you can't cut the ground but you expect to run ethernet over flat phone wire? Copper outside also has very high odds to become dangerous. I would expect more than $600 to be spent just on the isolation / attestation gear to keep a fault outside (ie a lightning strike with in a mile or so) from frying everything / killing someone. Remind whom ever is setting this tiny budget that improper installs on systems like this might make the company liable if the building burned down or someone was injured.

PS, Fiber is best. Pull a multistrand cable. (ie: 8 fibers in one jacket) You need at least 2 fibers anyway.

Otherwise use wireless but expect poor performance in the cost range you are listing.

 

[drebo]

The idea is probably that the copper line is already run (maybe the two buildings have a 25- or 50-pair run between them already, which is quite possible if it's two buildings on the same property and the telco/developer only had a single MPOE installed). The devices are not ethernet, per se, but rather use broadband signalling over a single twisted pair similar to DSL. They work "OK", but in the long term, you will end up replacing them so many times that spending an extra few hundred dollars on a proper fiber run or wireless bridge installation will seem cheap.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: drebo
The idea is probably that the copper line is already run (maybe the two buildings have a 25- or 50-pair run between them already, which is quite possible if it's two buildings on the same property and the telco/developer only had a single MPOE installed). The devices are not ethernet, per se, but rather use broadband signalling over a single twisted pair similar to DSL. They work "OK", but in the long term, you will end up replacing them so many times that spending an extra few hundred dollars on a proper fiber run or wireless bridge installation will seem cheap.

Yep. You can do it over twisted pair but the constant pain and hastle of them will make doing fiber or wireless seem cheap.

 

[kevnich2]

By the amount you want to spend, it simply isn't realistic. Find a way to get fiber installed. If you already have copper in a pipe already, hire a company to come out and run a fiber pair through your cable. But no matter what you do, $600 won't cut it and the distance your talking is not realistic or safe at all over copper. Fiber was designed for that distance, use it.

 

[Modelworks]

You could look at something like this:
http://www.vpi.us/eth-coax.html

That is $320 for the boxes not counting cable runs.

 

[imagoon]

Coax will be costly. You can't just run typical in house cable in a pipe in the ground / those distances.

It would not surprise me that you might need RG-11 Flooded type cable (for underground conduit)

 

[skyking]

so you can't cut the ground.......what are you going to do then? what are the resources, layout etc? I have run fiber overhead between existing structures for 120 foot spans, maybe you could bounce around with it and get there.
The MM fiber I used last was a dry pack with no shield, so no bonding issues or a need to convert inside buildings. I used a messenger wire to carry it, that cable never entered the building and had insulators on each end.
Most times you will have a GBIC slot on the existing switches so no big expense there.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

If you can't cut the ground, how are you going to run coax/STP cables? Are they already ran?

Fiber is the way to do it correctly. If you're against fiber, then a wireless option would work (although more expensive I believe).

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: imagoon
Coax will be costly. You can't just run typical in house cable in a pipe in the ground / those distances.

It would not surprise me that you might need RG-11 Flooded type cable (for underground conduit)

You run the same thing that the cable companies run. It has a support wire attached to the cable for aerial drops.

http://www.summitsource.com/pr...ref=1&products_id=8915

 

[bobdole369]

TO answer a few questions:

50 pair exists between the buildings. They are common-building warehouses. We have roof access and permission to run cable alongside existing cable. Grounding and arresters are already accounted for should we need to run CAT5 or Coax. The reason for the lack of desire to run fiber - is the lack of infrastructure to support it. We have no FMC's, switches with MFP's, patches, or anything at all. Desire to do the project as inexpensively as possible. We are supporting a VOIP phone and a single PC accessing a database (warehouse stuff).

Thus the question about coax. Do media converters exist to allow coax as the network cable (and its nice long runs) - as we have tons of RG-6 just laying around.

Should I not be able to make the run, wireless is the next option, however the point of the run is to deprecate the wireless link that already exists (and is very poor - 50% uptime at most).


http://www.vpi.us/eth-coax.html Now we are talking! This would exist on an existing pole, power and CAT5 arrested/grounded, Coax arrested/grounded. Pole grounded. And I mean real ground too - copper strap down the side of the building into a network of 8 foot deep rods. We have lightning protection covered.

The best I had been able to do so far was a bit dicy - showing 30mbits over flat phone cable, which means I could have used a pair of the 50-pair that runs between the bays.

http://www.bb-elec.com/product...y.asp?MultiFamilyId=71

 

[imagoon]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: imagoon
Coax will be costly. You can't just run typical in house cable in a pipe in the ground / those distances.

It would not surprise me that you might need RG-11 Flooded type cable (for underground conduit)

You run the same thing that the cable companies run. It has a support wire attached to the cable for aerial drops.

http://www.summitsource.com/pr...ref=1&products_id=8915

Partly true but you need to check your part numbers, what you listed is coax with a ground wire. That website calls it a support wire but it most definitely is not. Also cable co will only use RG6 for the last few feet of service. The rest of the network is something like RG318/U etc.

Also RG6 is about -5.6db / 100 ft. 560+ feet of it would leave almost useless signal levels at the other end since most devices push out about +15.

RG11 is better but will still attenuate the signal at that distance.

 

[bobdole369]

Also RG6 is about -5.6db / 100 ft. 560+ feet of it would leave almost useless signal levels at the other end since most devices push out about +15

That all depends on the frequency. That figure looks to be at 700 mhz. I don't know what frequency that linked device works at, lets hope its low, like under 100 mhz, where my whole run of rg-6 gives me 8db loss.

I'm not moving cable TV here, or supporting a huge data network.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: imagoon

Partly true but you need to check your part numbers, what you listed is coax with a ground wire. That website calls it a support wire but it most definitely is not. Also cable co will only use RG6 for the last few feet of service. The rest of the network is something like RG318/U etc.

Also RG6 is about -5.6db / 100 ft. 560+ feet of it would leave almost useless signal levels at the other end since most devices push out about +15.

RG11 is better but will still attenuate the signal at that distance.

Some call them ground wires other call them messenger wires, it is the same thing most of the time.

The devices output 1.5Ghz . Max receive is 0 ~ -76dBm
Even at 7db of loss that gets you over 600 feet.
-73db gets you 64Mbps minimum.

To the OP, you can google for MOCA to find the converters.
Or go here:
http://www.mocalliance.org/ind...certified_products.php

 

[bobdole369]

TNX info modelworks. at 1.5ghz - that puts my 40ish db down - so I'm still positive, would have completely usable signal. I think this is the way to go.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: bobdole369
TNX info modelworks. at 1.5ghz - that puts my 40ish db down - so I'm still positive, would have completely usable signal. I think this is the way to go.

I saw these from actiontec they seem to be easy to use:
http://www.provantage.com/acti...me2200-02~7ACTI04X.htm


datasheet here:
http://www.actiontec.com/produ...dapter%20Datasheet.pdf

 

[imagoon]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: imagoon

Partly true but you need to check your part numbers, what you listed is coax with a ground wire. That website calls it a support wire but it most definitely is not. Also cable co will only use RG6 for the last few feet of service. The rest of the network is something like RG318/U etc.

Also RG6 is about -5.6db / 100 ft. 560+ feet of it would leave almost useless signal levels at the other end since most devices push out about +15.

RG11 is better but will still attenuate the signal at that distance.

Some call them ground wires other call them messenger wires, it is the same thing most of the time.

The devices output 1.5Ghz . Max receive is 0 ~ -76dBm
Even at 7db of loss that gets you over 600 feet.
-73db gets you 64Mbps minimum.

To the OP, you can google for MOCA to find the converters.
Or go here:
http://www.mocalliance.org/ind...certified_products.php

I would still use RG11 at that length. There are connectors, lightning attestation and all that jaz that needs to attached to the cable. There should be at least 6 connections in that cable. Device <-> lightning protection <-> lightning protection #2 <-> device.

Granted the connection on a properly terminated wire is .15 ~ .5 db loss. The protectors have their own loss (insertion loss) and add signal reflections (return losses) which may or may not matter.

It all adds up. Suppressors also have a wide range of loss based on the frequency and their protection level.

 

[spidey07]

If you have twisted pair there are extenders. You could also use long range ethernet (cisco makes some switches for this very purpose). Both of these are proprietary, non standard stuff. I despise the ethernet extenders and have had nothing but trouble from them.

 

[aE0n]

Take a look at these.

http://www.smarthome.com/6407E...Ethernet-Bridge/p.aspx

 

[skyking]

Originally posted by: spidey07
If you have twisted pair there are extenders. You could also use long range ethernet (cisco makes some switches for this very purpose). Both of these are proprietary, non standard stuff. I despise the ethernet extenders and have had nothing but trouble from them.

So things like these are a PITA?
I've used the cisco LRE stuff for a few installations. Rock solid.

 

[spidey07]

The extenders are a PITA, they don't give you any indication of what's wrong. Cisco LRE stuff is fine and would be what I'd recommend. Probably in OPs price range.

But I don't see why wireless is ruled out, just slap some directional antennas on the roof. If the wireless link is acting up, fix it. I've put in countless interbuilding wireless setups and the only time they have problems is when the antennas get covered in an ice storm. If done properly they are very reliable.

 

[skyking]

Originally posted by: skyking

Originally posted by: spidey07
If you have twisted pair there are extenders. You could also use long range ethernet (cisco makes some switches for this very purpose). Both of these are proprietary, non standard stuff. I despise the ethernet extenders and have had nothing but trouble from them.

So things like these are a PITA?
I've used the cisco LRE stuff for a few installations. Rock solid.

oops I left out the link.
patton product.

 

[bobdole369]

But I don't see why wireless is ruled out, just slap some directional antennas on the roof. If the wireless link is acting up, fix it. I've put in countless interbuilding wireless setups and the only time they have problems is when the antennas get covered in an ice storm. If done properly they are very reliable.

3com building to building bridge is currently in place. It makes a 600 ft link across the parking lot from our main building. Palm trees are growing up into the path. All of them, and I've seen the signal strength go from -25ish to under -70 now. Repointing and repositioning is helping, but the best fix is to connect that warehouse with a wire to another warehouse served by a point to point link.

 

[Gillbot]

I had fiber ran in my old house. If I could do it out of pocket in my house, your budget should allow for it with frugal shopping.