WiFi To Outdoor Barn

[stevech]

Very good point - if they have their own Electric drops, the different in ground potential could be very, erm, disconcerting...

Definitely reach out to a qualified electrician if you intend to string CAT5/5e/6 out to the barn from the house - and do so before you connect things up - we'd like to ensure that you have the chance to report back on how it worked out.

sfx

cat5 would be in a separate conduit, or better, just use direct-bury cat5. For ethernet cat5, there's no common ground among the cat5 cable wires. By intent. They are differential. So no worries about the electrical neutral.

 

[chadster766]

I'm troubled by the recommendations to run Ethernet cables over 270ft.

For cabled Ethernet I recommend sticking to TIA Data Cabling installation and standards.

Some Basics:

1. 270ft max for single Cat5 or Cat6 run
2. Cross power at a 90 degree angle
3. If you have to run with power use Shielded Twisted Pair and ground the shield.
4. Keep at least a foot away from power when running Unshielded Twisted Pair parallel to power (voltage depending).
5. Don't pull cable tight across a 90 degree corner
6. Don't allow the cable to kink

If you don't stick to the standard a user could spend a lot of money trenching to only have it fail in the end.

 

[azazel1024]

I'm troubled by the recommendations to run Ethernet cables over 270ft.

For cabled Ethernet I recommend sticking to TIA Data Cabling installation and standards.

Some Basics:

1. 270ft max for single Cat5 or Cat6 run
2. Cross power at a 90 degree angle
3. If you have to run with power use Shielded Twisted Pair and ground the shield.
4. Keep at least a foot away from power when running Unshielded Twisted Pair parallel to power (voltage depending).
5. Don't pull cable tight across a 90 degree corner
6. Don't allow the cable to kink

If you don't stick to the standard a user could spend a lot of money trenching to only have it fail in the end.

Its why you test before you trench. Cat5e is supposed to be good for a 100m run of solid core cable with a 10m stranded Cat5e cable on each end and stand up to full gigabit speeds. If you are running solid core from switch to switch (or router, or any other active device) you should in theory be able to do at least 120m direct connect. Possibly even a bit longer with the right NIC and the right run. I certainly wouldn't chance more than 100m, but in theory it might work.

With Cat6, the wire gauge is generally a step higher and it is also generally less susceptible to interference. Its also only rated to the same 100m+2x10m for gigabit as Cat5e, but I'd bet my bottom dollar it can do more than that. On simple impedence it should be able to manage at least 20% longer due to the larger wire gauge.

All of the suggested installation techniques are nice, but they are also in general massive overkill, especially for a single wire installation. I've tested a lot of less than ideal setups, like running a wire for 50ft right on a 240v line and zero detectable difference in performance versus having it located 3ft away, or against a 10ft run with no electrical lines anywhere near it. Now, that might change if it was a 300ft run, or if there was something VERY noisy on the 240v electrical, but I've tried hard to induce interference and nothing has batted an eye on gigabit over Cat5e.

Cat6 and Cat6a would be even more immune to such things. Granted, I am not running a server room with hundreds of cables or trunks with 20 cables bundled together, but at least in a home setup, its awfully hard to induce interference that has a measurable impact. That doesn't mean you shouldn't follow best practices where it makes sense to.

For shielded, you need to be very, very careful running shielded below ground as THIS can setup a voltage differential in your home's ground setup depending on how you are grounding it out at the end points.

Honestly based on cost, I'd just get a couple of transcievers, a couple of mini GBIC fiber adapters and run fiber for the length and then you don't need to worry about any of it.

~300ft though is well within the tolerance of Cat5e to carry gigabit at full speed (its 328ft+ a pair of 33ft stranded cables on either end).

 

[chadster766]

Its why you test before you trench. Cat5e is supposed to be good for a 100m run of solid core cable with a 10m stranded Cat5e cable on each end and stand up to full gigabit speeds. If you are running solid core from switch to switch (or router, or any other active device) you should in theory be able to do at least 120m direct connect. Possibly even a bit longer with the right NIC and the right run. I certainly wouldn't chance more than 100m, but in theory it might work.
90m is the max not including the patch cables. Below is a quick quote for wiki. I can't speed a lot of time reviewing my network cabling course I took ages ago
Under TIA/EIA-568-B, maximum allowable horizontal cable distance is 90m of installed cabling

With Cat6, the wire gauge is generally a step higher and it is also generally less susceptible to interference. Its also only rated to the same 100m+2x10m for gigabit as Cat5e, but I'd bet my bottom dollar it can do more than that. On simple impedence it should be able to manage at least 20% longer due to the larger wire gauge.
The 20% you speak of is not code

All of the suggested installation techniques are nice, but they are also in general massive overkill, especially for a single wire installation. I've tested a lot of less than ideal setups, like running a wire for 50ft right on a 240v line and zero detectable difference in performance versus having it located 3ft away, or against a 10ft run with no electrical lines anywhere near it. Now, that might change if it was a 300ft run, or if there was something VERY noisy on the 240v electrical, but I've tried hard to induce interference and nothing has batted an eye on gigabit over Cat5e.
Typically power is in a grounded conduit but running with power unshielded is not code

Cat6 and Cat6a would be even more immune to such things. Granted, I am not running a server room with hundreds of cables or trunks with 20 cables bundled together, but at least in a home setup, its awfully hard to induce interference that has a measurable impact. That doesn't mean you shouldn't follow best practices where it makes sense to.

For shielded, you need to be very, very careful running shielded below ground as THIS can setup a voltage differential in your home's ground setup depending on how you are grounding it out at the end points.

Honestly based on cost, I'd just get a couple of transcievers, a couple of mini GBIC fiber adapters and run fiber for the length and then you don't need to worry about any of it.

~300ft though is well within the tolerance of Cat5e to carry gigabit at full speed (its 328ft+ a pair of 33ft stranded cables on either end).

Comments above:

 

[stevech]

I'm troubled by the recommendations to run Ethernet cables over 270ft.

For cabled Ethernet I recommend sticking to TIA Data Cabling installation and standards.

Some Basics:

1. 270ft max for single Cat5 or Cat6 run
2. Cross power at a 90 degree angle
3. If you have to run with power use Shielded Twisted Pair and ground the shield.
4. Keep at least a foot away from power when running Unshielded Twisted Pair parallel to power (voltage depending).
   It'll most likely work fine.
   
   Too much talk and debate about a commonplace activity.
   
   
5. Don't pull cable tight across a 90 degree corner
6. Don't allow the cable to kink

If you don't stick to the standard a user could spend a lot of money trenching to only have it fail in the end.

I agree with others... to be sure, connect and test speed the spool/box of cat5 or cat5e before it goes in the ground. Obviously. Either buried-direct or in conduit.

 

[azazel1024]

Hmm. you are right. I guess I had this crazy idea it was 100+2x10. Apparently it is 90+2x5. That still means you could have a single run of 100m of solid core, potentially with no problems.

For the cat6, of course it isn't up to standards (no such thing as code. Code would generally speak to electrical, building, plumbing, fire, etc code, which doesn't have anything that I am aware of that applies to network wiring). However, I think it isn't a stretch of the imagination to say that TIA/EIA-568 standards are set at a limit where it is "install and don't worry about it".

I can't wrap my head around 5e being suitable for 90+2x5, Cat6 with generally thicker wiring gauge and better AXTE characteristics only being able to handle the same distance and Cat6a the same...even though it can do 10GbE to 90+2x5 also.

The higher frequency ability of Cat6 and 6a would generally mean that they attenuate the base signal frequency that 1000Base-t is transmitted at less than Cat5e would.

For the 240v, I don't speak to running it underground or through conduit. This is a residential installation. Not buried. There is nothing in electrical code against running low voltage wiring with 120/240v if it is not in conduit. Doesn't make it advisable, but it isn't against code. And yes, I'd generally try to avoid it.

100m of direct bury cat5e or cat6 is pretty cheap. If burial wasn't an issue, I'd still buy it and try it and if it worked fine, bury it.

PS as a note, for feeces and giglges I actually terminated both ends of a 500ft box of Cat6 awhile back and hooked it up. It worked okay with Gigabit, but I did notice some packet loss according to wireshark and speeds were down somewhat. My Switch cable diagnostics did not like the cable (told me it was >100m bad connection). It did work though and its also pushing quite a bit longer than ~328ft total spec (solid core Cat6). Some of it also could have been that the entire bundle was still coiled up, except for the few feet I had to pull out to terminate and jack in to my switches. I don't know exactly what length of Cat6, or who's Cat6 will actually work well out past 100m total length, but it can. Standards are generally set at the lowest level of what is know to always work (if installed/terminated/whatever properly), that doesn't mean they can't ever be exceeded and still work just fine.

 

[chadster766]

I wonder if the reason Cat6 kept the same standard as Cat5 is because it might have more twists per inch and actually be longer over the same distance.

 

[htismaqe]

Honestly based on cost, I'd just get a couple of transcievers, a couple of mini GBIC fiber adapters and run fiber for the length and then you don't need to worry about any of it.

If money were really no object, this is the approach I would use.

Fiber is a stable and permanent solution with few, if any, of the limitations you have with copper.

Pretty sure you could get 500-ft of pre-terminated SMF for around $250.

 

[azazel1024]

I wonder if the reason Cat6 kept the same standard as Cat5 is because it might have more twists per inch and actually be longer over the same distance.

Actually that could be exactly it. I can't test like length once you are butting up or over the standards. I only have about 30ft of 5e left and the box I used to terminate both ends is now down to ~300ft doing installs. At some point I might end up getting a 1,000ft box (before an addition I am putting in in a couple of years) and for fun I might just try terminating both ends of that and seeing if anything happens (IE can it see anything over the wire, or is it just too attenuated).

 

[azazel1024]

If money were really no object, this is the approach I would use.

Fiber is a stable and permanent solution with few, if any, of the limitations you have with copper.

Pretty sure you could get 500-ft of pre-terminated SMF for around $250.

Probably. You could probably know it down some if you were looking at just 300ft. IIRC I was looking at 150ft of MMF with LC ends (as that is roughly the length I need to run from my "network closet" to my outdoor shed/future dettached garage and it works with the gear I have now) and direct bury cable would be something like $75 for the 150ft (I think I actually only need about 130ft, but should give me some margin for safety). Only thing I don't own is a transciever for the SFP module on the other end for a wifi AP to plug in to the transceiver. I do happen to have a couple of switches with SFP ports as well as a pair of SFP modlues laying around. Sadly only 3ft of fiber (just for testing purposes).

 

[kanewolf]

If money were really no object, this is the approach I would use.

Fiber is a stable and permanent solution with few, if any, of the limitations you have with copper.

Pretty sure you could get 500-ft of pre-terminated SMF for around $250.

According to Corning reference material, OM2 (50 micron) multimode is good for at least 600m at gigabit. I wouldn't recommend SMF (single-mode fiber) because the cost of optics is much greater than that of multimode optics.

 

[chadster766]

According to Corning reference material, OM2 (50 micron) multimode is good for at least 600m at gigabit. I wouldn't recommend SMF (single-mode fiber) because the cost of optics is much greater than that of multimode optics.

I use standard multimode good for 550m

 

[htismaqe]

According to Corning reference material, OM2 (50 micron) multimode is good for at least 600m at gigabit. I wouldn't recommend SMF (single-mode fiber) because the cost of optics is much greater than that of multimode optics.

I haven't purchased MMF in ages so I was providing pricing on SMF for frame of reference. If 500-ft of SMF is $250, you can expect pre-terminated MMF to be a reasonable margin cheaper. I wasn't actually suggesting he purchase SMF, sorry for the confusion.

And you are correct. Gigabit optics for MMF, like 1000bSX are LEDs vs. actual high-output lasers so they are considerably cheaper.

 

[stevech]

Fiber? for 270ft. or so?

You guys are way over-thinking this.

 

[L&LD]

I don't know what the total and final cost of the fiber link would be, but if it was reasonable and within the OP's budget, why not?

 

[sfx2000]

cat5 would be in a separate conduit, or better, just use direct-bury cat5. For ethernet cat5, there's no common ground among the cat5 cable wires. By intent. They are differential. So no worries about the electrical neutral.

Yeah, but the gear is grounded across different circuits... which bothers me - each circuit has it's own ground, and depending on soil and construction - we don't know if the outbuilding is code-compliant here.

I don't know if this is the latent EE inside of me or watching too many OSHA videos...

Be safe...

 

[sfx2000]

And perhaps this has a bit to do with lightning strikes and the like...

just saying... if you're running any kind of cable between building A and building B, hire a professional to take a look...

 

[stevech]

I don't know what the total and final cost of the fiber link would be, but if it was reasonable and within the OP's budget, why not?

copper/fiber media converters x 2
fiber cable/terminated

versus

cat5 cable

nuts.

 

[azazel1024]

Sure, it would be higher. Has the advantage of not having to worry about ground potentials or lightning strikes (okay, granted, a close enough lightning strike could damage the fiber, but it isn't going to ground through the wiring and out through your networking gear like it could with buried cat5).

Also likely future support for much higher speeds. You are NOT going to get 10GbE with buried cat5e or cat6 at nearly 100m of distance. You might/probably be able to do it with cat6a, but 100m of direct bury cat6a is also probably going to set you back >$200, which is actually more than fiber would likely cost.

A couple of used transceivers and SFP modules might only set you back $60-80 total. Plus maybe $100-150 for the fiber. Call it $200-250 versus maybe $70-120 for direct bury cat5e/6 for that length, then less worries and better future proofing on the fiber.

Obviously if it is out of budget, why consider it? If it is within budget, it just might be worth it.

Me personally, I am ripping down my old attached garage and building a slightly larger one with a master suite over it in a couple of years. I am going to run Cat6, but thinking about it and looking at the price, I think I might do a single run of MMF to a closet in the master suite. For the relatively short distance involved, maybe 50ft, it should be pretty cheap and since I do not EVER want to have to open those walls once it is built (and will have zero access, unlike a lot of the rest of my house which is accessible or accessible-ish either from my basement unfinished storage room or from crawl space)...why not? Call it $30-50 and then having something that is likely to be pretty darned future proof for a very significant number of years well past when 10GbE is standard, why not?

Or maybe even fiber to the closet and fiber from there to where it is likely we'll have a desk setup for our laptop. Might never need it, but cost is pretty cheap compared to the overall likely cost of the addition/reno (~$35-50k doing most of the work ourselves).

 

[L&LD]

If we're in the $200 - $300 range anyway, I too would go for the slightly more expensive but better option, budget allowing.