Extension cabinet wiring help

[bitswapper]

I need to install phones in a remote building, about 160 feet from the main switch. I have 4 twisted pair to work with, that gives me 4 standard phones, or 2 feature phones. They want 6, (with features of course). I have 6 pair buried but I am using 2 pair for the LAN. An extension cabinet would solve the problem (I think). Can any one tell me what the minimum requirement, (number of wires and distance) for an extension cabinet, or point me to a wiring diagram of the extension cable.

Thanks for any help

George

 

[392]

No such thing as an extension cabinet on an ACS, and the PII cabinet expansion cable has a distance limitation of ~12 feet and uses ~18 conductors.

You need not to be mixing transport types under the same sheath. The ring signal and data pairs on the Partner extensions will play he*l on your data, inducing all kinds of errors in it, not to mention what a lightning strike would do.

You need a 12 pair drop with the proper number of IROBs to protect it. If they won't approve the required cabling per Avaya specs, walk away. It will bite you if you don't, I've seen it too many times.

 

[telprog]

392 is giving you very good advise, about the only thing you can do with what you have is maybe give them some cordless phones.

 

[bitswapper]

Thanks 392

I over looked the ring and data problem, that on top of ground problems, each building has its own power line. My other option is to take my LAN wireless. This has turned into freebie he*l. started with computers 4 years ago and now phones. (yes its a church and I'm easy).

Thanks for the good info
George

 

[392]

I totally understand - as an Assistant Scoutmaster, I've turned a few "leftover" telephone systems into Eagle projects, and several more as community service installs. One thing that I've learned over the years is that a curteous gesture in assisting can turn into a frustrating nightmare for everyone involved if you turn hopeful speculation into half-as*ed attempts due to cash or time constraints. It's much more of an assist (and you'll end up getting a lot more respect and admiration) if you realistically look at the way it *should* be done and then do it that way, rather than "making it work" with what might currently be available. Maybe a quick self-support aerial span would cure the problem? I'll donate a reel of UV resistant CAT 5 cable, if you can use it.

 

[twofeathers]

392 said it all......
As Scoutmaster for our Boy Scout troop we were asked as an Eagle Project to install phones in a building located 300' from the main building. 4 phones, and of course they wanted features. The Church has a Partner Plus. Heres what we did.
I furnished a 206 standalone 4.0. We used station 26-27 as
CO ports to the 206. (from Partner Plus) At the out building, programmed the stations, MLS12 sets to intercom first. That forced them to dial 9 for a outside line. This way they could intercom to the main building. From the main building they would dial station 26-27 to the out building which would ring in on CO 1-2 and then transfer to station.
A MUST.......IROBs need to be installed on each end.
I wasen't the best way to do the job......but it works for now untill they have enough money, or get some other easy Scout to bury new cable between the buildings.
*******392 Just a question? Would this still play he*l on his data. I realise the ring voltage is there...
For curisoty I set up this situitation in my office through a 300' coil of wire and I did not see any data errors or problems. (I used 4 pair C-5, blue pair sta 26, brown pair
sta 27. or-gn data. ?????

A Scout uses his resources.

 

[392]

Yeah. I've seen everything from continuous error/resend packets to blown data ports, depending upon the inductance (or pure short!). The problem lies in the unknown quality of the cable. If it's Cat5e, it'll be twisted way beyond what would be needed to choke spikes, inducted noise or RF. But most places like this have a direct buried 6 pair PIC drop cable, Cat 3 at best, and usually Cat 2. On a 100MB or GigaSpeed network, it won't take much to incur packet loss at the port. I've also seen cases of telephone system interference (digital PBX) due to broadband "leakage" of ultra high speed data pipes over coax, so the reverse can also happen.

That said, IROBs will attack excess spikes at the station ports, but lightning won't respect the other conductors in or near the sheath. A proximity strike can flash over a wet parking lot a couple hundred feet and enter the cable easily. While the Partner will take most of that on the chin, even minor migration into the data pairs will blow the data port and/or PCs. I've seen such a strike permanently "rainbow" 20 monitors, kill 2 hubs and a switch and start a small fire at the entry point: a 12 pair drop feeding a satellite building at a local business. The strike point was well over 100 feet away, but the nearest pure ground was the telephone system ground at the entry. The telephone system never missed a beat, but the data side totaled ~$5K in damage. Lucky it happened in the afternoon when they were open, the fire could have leveled the building.

So, purely electronically speaking, the level of inductance and subsequent interference in a given installation is dependent upon insulation quality, distance & proximity of induction, frequency of the source and choke potential of the target's cable design. All that adds up to a "go - no go" trial after installation, unless you use a packet sniffer to verify integrity. I bet a Fluke or MicroTest scanner would fail the circuit due to NEXT and RMS voltages.

But in common sense terms, it's a liability to mix transport types under a common sheath without utilizing a hybrid cable to prevent migration. I'd hate to be the one pointed at with a boney finger by the Pastor when the Fire Marshall asks "who done it"!

 

[bitswapper]

Hi 392

Thanks for the cable offer, I would like to go over head, but I get the looks ugly issue. I think it will end up that way, but I have to go easy. - twofeathers, that is an interesting idea, as for the cross talk issue, there is an outside line (bypassing the switch) running in the existing cable with no apparent problems. There is a lot of internet and print traffic on the network. (the copier in the main office is on the LAN), but remember it is a 2 pair LAN (10Mb) very forgiving. I will look for an IROB for the lines, sounds like a worthwhile safeguard. (the LUC-146G will protect 4 pair, will that work?). I will probably go with standard phones in the remote area to eliminate the data traffic in the wire bundle. I really appriciate the help, I plan to start this next weekend.

Thanks

George