kevbri
Technical User
- Apr 30, 2001
- 8
I have a building that has cat5 stranded cable in the walls. I want to use patch panels. My question is do I need to replace the stranded cable with solid cable?
kevbri
kevbri
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations strongm on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Stranded Cable out of Patch Panel
- Thread starter kevbri
- Start date
- Status
Guest_imported
New member
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
There will undoubtedly be different specs for stranded and solid core Cat5. In practical terms, I've found installations where stranded has been used made no noticable difference at all - 100Mbps worked fine.
If we're talking relatively short lengths, then I wouldn't be worried at all, but if you're near to cable length limits, then some attenuation/bandwidth tests might put your mind at rest.
ROGER - GØAOZ.
If we're talking relatively short lengths, then I wouldn't be worried at all, but if you're near to cable length limits, then some attenuation/bandwidth tests might put your mind at rest.
ROGER - GØAOZ.
probably someone who uses low Ox monster cable at home, Tweakit conducting fluid on his/her connectors and who had a small amount of EE knowledge about the fact that stranded cable can carry more voltage/current then solid ( more surface area.. high voltage runs across the surface.. not the center).. yah never know when your data cable will be a lighting rod drain to ground ;-)
(removing tongue from cheek)
MikeS
Find me at
"Diplomacy; the art of saying 'nice doggie' till you can find a rock" Wynn Catlin
(removing tongue from cheek)
MikeS
Find me at
"Diplomacy; the art of saying 'nice doggie' till you can find a rock" Wynn Catlin
Kevbri, are you wondering as to whether or not the "braided" (thats what I call it) will punch in okay? If this is what you are wondering, I would have to say that you will just have to try it out.
whybnormal, your kidding! would that be comparable to me spraying my soundcard's edge connector with contact cleaner, claiming my high's sound sharper and the bass is tighter...
whybnormal, your kidding! would that be comparable to me spraying my soundcard's edge connector with contact cleaner, claiming my high's sound sharper and the bass is tighter...
Of course I'm kidding.. ... but I'd swear I could about another 5 khz of highs after erasing the ISA sound card connectors and using Mountain Dew on the plug .. must be the caffine ..
Mandatory Thread Content ::::::::
One thing to watch for in punching down stranded cable is the strands can flatten out and not make good contact on the spreader pin. You might THINK it's punched and it MIGHT work for awhile and then crap out (solidly if you are lucky)
One idea.. thats ALL it is.. terminate the stranded to RJ45.. get a handful of *certified* pass-through female/female connectors.. make a short solid patch cord with one end punched and the other end with a RJ45. Now you can connect it all together with a decent punch and not have to repull the cable.. mickymouse? absolutedly.. would I be proud of this.. not a chance.. would it work.. yup.
Like I said, just an idea.
MikeS Find me at
"Diplomacy; the art of saying 'nice doggie' till you can find a rock" Wynn Catlin
... but I'd swear I could about another 5 khz of highs after erasing the ISA sound card connectors and using Mountain Dew on the plug .. must be the caffine ..Mandatory Thread Content ::::::::
One thing to watch for in punching down stranded cable is the strands can flatten out and not make good contact on the spreader pin. You might THINK it's punched and it MIGHT work for awhile and then crap out (solidly if you are lucky)
One idea.. thats ALL it is.. terminate the stranded to RJ45.. get a handful of *certified* pass-through female/female connectors.. make a short solid patch cord with one end punched and the other end with a RJ45. Now you can connect it all together with a decent punch and not have to repull the cable.. mickymouse? absolutedly.. would I be proud of this.. not a chance.. would it work.. yup.
Like I said, just an idea.
MikeS Find me at
"Diplomacy; the art of saying 'nice doggie' till you can find a rock" Wynn Catlin
MWM
MIS
- Aug 9, 2001
- 200
Kevbri;
You might be able to terminate it mechanically, but
1) Insulation Displacement contacts are designed for either stranded or solid conductors. RJ-45 plugs, for example, are manufactured for one or the other, though I might have heard of one that allows both. Patchpanels expects solid.
2) Solid conductors are specified for TIA/EIA 568 CAT 5 horizontal and backbone cables. Stranded, owing to higher attenuation, is allowed only for patchcords. You will never be able to claim that the installation meets any accepted standards.
This means that while you might get the stuff to "work" (whatever that means) you can not guarantee any performance level.
This is important. Especially if you are on the hook for performance.
Mike, RCDD
You might be able to terminate it mechanically, but
1) Insulation Displacement contacts are designed for either stranded or solid conductors. RJ-45 plugs, for example, are manufactured for one or the other, though I might have heard of one that allows both. Patchpanels expects solid.
2) Solid conductors are specified for TIA/EIA 568 CAT 5 horizontal and backbone cables. Stranded, owing to higher attenuation, is allowed only for patchcords. You will never be able to claim that the installation meets any accepted standards.
This means that while you might get the stuff to "work" (whatever that means) you can not guarantee any performance level.
This is important. Especially if you are on the hook for performance.
Mike, RCDD
Not really true!! Both CAT5 and CAT5e do come in stranded form as well!! I can do a "channel" test on Microtest or Fluke tester that will pass a CAT5/e test .. stranded patch lead to solid core installed cable and back again to stranded patch lead!! Factory made cables that claim to be CAT5/e have to be tested to that standard!! Otherwise, there's no point in going to all the trouble of installing a CAT5/e network if your patch/fly leads can't handle it!!
As an addition, a few months ago some cable installers were running in some cable in a comms room to link active equipment cabs to patching cabs. About 20 drums of cable were delivered. In among the drums of cable a drum of stranded cable managed to get in. This was run in with the stranded by mistake and this wasn't spotted until the loom was tie wrapped in the trays and up the cabinet ready to be terminated. So, just as a test we terminated it both ends and tested it to CAT5e with a Wavetech CAT5e tester. To my utter supprise it passed with flying colours. I tested it another two or three times and it passed everytime, so we left it in!! I admit that it was only about thirty meters long but it worked a treat!! Go figure!!
Chris.
As an addition, a few months ago some cable installers were running in some cable in a comms room to link active equipment cabs to patching cabs. About 20 drums of cable were delivered. In among the drums of cable a drum of stranded cable managed to get in. This was run in with the stranded by mistake and this wasn't spotted until the loom was tie wrapped in the trays and up the cabinet ready to be terminated. So, just as a test we terminated it both ends and tested it to CAT5e with a Wavetech CAT5e tester. To my utter supprise it passed with flying colours. I tested it another two or three times and it passed everytime, so we left it in!! I admit that it was only about thirty meters long but it worked a treat!! Go figure!!
Chris.
MWM
MIS
- Aug 9, 2001
- 200
Guys;
... As Cowboy says, there is no such thing as a certifiable stranded CAT 5[e]link or channel as defined by the standards. BUT there are performance levels that can be met and thus they qualify the cable as meeting the performance spec, not the link or channel spec, (you know, the EIA/TIA 568-A & B standards) which requires solid conductors..
So, there is testing of cable and testing of links/channels : these are totally different things.
Likewise, there is testing to performance and testing to standards : again, not the same thing.
Yours,
Mike, RCDD, CCNA
... As Cowboy says, there is no such thing as a certifiable stranded CAT 5[e]link or channel as defined by the standards. BUT there are performance levels that can be met and thus they qualify the cable as meeting the performance spec, not the link or channel spec, (you know, the EIA/TIA 568-A & B standards) which requires solid conductors..
So, there is testing of cable and testing of links/channels : these are totally different things.
Likewise, there is testing to performance and testing to standards : again, not the same thing.
Yours,
Mike, RCDD, CCNA
The TIA 568A/B standard takes into account patch cables for channel links.
"568A only allows for 20% more attenuation in flexible cables (patchcord) compared to the fixed solid core cable. The 20% attenuation generally means that a 24 AWG patchcord is required. ISO 11801 and EN 50173 allow for 50% more attenuation in patchcords and so for these standards a patchcord can be implemented in 26 or 24 AWG, with 26 AWG being the cheaper of the two."
If the standards didn't allow for patch cables then there really wouldn't be any point in having a CAT5/CAT5e installation done. Yeah, we'll put CAT5e runs in and test it to standards. Then we'll patch in your equipment with some "telephone" cable! In that senario, standards wouldn't be of much use or comfort to the poor customer.
Anyway, the TIA 568-A/B standards as documented on the BICSI site mention patch cords as part of the 568A/B standard.
Also, got this off ...
"The channel, as described in TIA 568B and ISO 11801, includes up to 90 meters of horizontal cable, a work area equipment cord, an optional transition point, 2 cross-connections in the telecommunications closet, a patch jumper between these two connections, and a telecommunications closet equipment cord. In simple terms, the channel includes everything necessary to get data from a PC in an office to a hub in a wiring closet."
So, I might be wrong about this but all the information seems to suggest that the channel link is part of the standard, patch cables and all. If you have any information to the contrary then please post a link. I'm always willing to learn new things.
Regards,
Chris.
************************
Chris Andrew, CCNA
chrisac@gmx.co.uk
************************
"568A only allows for 20% more attenuation in flexible cables (patchcord) compared to the fixed solid core cable. The 20% attenuation generally means that a 24 AWG patchcord is required. ISO 11801 and EN 50173 allow for 50% more attenuation in patchcords and so for these standards a patchcord can be implemented in 26 or 24 AWG, with 26 AWG being the cheaper of the two."
If the standards didn't allow for patch cables then there really wouldn't be any point in having a CAT5/CAT5e installation done. Yeah, we'll put CAT5e runs in and test it to standards. Then we'll patch in your equipment with some "telephone" cable! In that senario, standards wouldn't be of much use or comfort to the poor customer.
Anyway, the TIA 568-A/B standards as documented on the BICSI site mention patch cords as part of the 568A/B standard.
Also, got this off ...
"The channel, as described in TIA 568B and ISO 11801, includes up to 90 meters of horizontal cable, a work area equipment cord, an optional transition point, 2 cross-connections in the telecommunications closet, a patch jumper between these two connections, and a telecommunications closet equipment cord. In simple terms, the channel includes everything necessary to get data from a PC in an office to a hub in a wiring closet."
So, I might be wrong about this but all the information seems to suggest that the channel link is part of the standard, patch cables and all. If you have any information to the contrary then please post a link. I'm always willing to learn new things.
Regards,
Chris.
************************
Chris Andrew, CCNA
chrisac@gmx.co.uk
************************
MWM
MIS
- Aug 9, 2001
- 200
Yes, Chris, I agree that patch cables are of course included in a channel; in fact, I believe that the link versus channel definitions are specifically to include the connecting cables for a more accurate and meaningful test, especially at Cat 6 speeds.
Perhaps I was mistaken in that the length mentioned was thirty meters, which of course is not a patch cable, precisely speaking, but a link. And if it is actually a link, then it would have to be solid to be meet standards and be certified. Right?
Yours,
Mike
Perhaps I was mistaken in that the length mentioned was thirty meters, which of course is not a patch cable, precisely speaking, but a link. And if it is actually a link, then it would have to be solid to be meet standards and be certified. Right?
Yours,
Mike
Oh yeah, that thirty meter "in wall" cable was definitely a mistake, not really CAT5e standard at all as a channel link. The channel specification does state up to 90m "solid" cable and upto 10m patch cable. That was stranded all the way. We were just lucky that it actually passed a CAT5e test and the decision was made to leave it in. Personally I wanted to take it out but the decision was out of my hands. It was in effect a thirty meter patch cable.
I think that we both agree now! Appologies for the mis-understanding.
Chris.
************************
Chris Andrew, CCNA
chrisac@gmx.co.uk
************************
I think that we both agree now! Appologies for the mis-understanding.
Chris.
************************
Chris Andrew, CCNA
chrisac@gmx.co.uk
************************
Guest_imported
New member
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
I am trying to advise my company to not terminate horizontal runs on a 110 block and use patch panels instead.
They are using standard patch cables then from the 110 block to the equipment. Rationale here is that if you use patch panels people start moving cables and the wiring closet becomes a spegheti net. Can someone out there point me to the right standards/urls that speak against punching down horizontal runs on 110 blocks? Thanks.
They are using standard patch cables then from the 110 block to the equipment. Rationale here is that if you use patch panels people start moving cables and the wiring closet becomes a spegheti net. Can someone out there point me to the right standards/urls that speak against punching down horizontal runs on 110 blocks? Thanks.
daronwilson
Vendor
Using 110 blocks is acceptable if the blocks are rated for the channel that you are installing (Cat5, Cat5e, etc). However, I fail to see how this is going to be any more organized or easier than having the horizontal wiring permanently terminated on patch panels. Also, I personally consider the 110 block patch connector a weak point in the link. The type of termination and patch really has little to do with keeping the spagetti level down. Layout, wire management panels, velcro ties, proper length patch cables, and a locked equipment room door seem to be the factors needed to keep the wiring in proper order.
You can refer to the EIA/TIA 568 standards, or there are numberous interpretations of those standards (usually every vendor has this data in the back of their catalog on structured wiring) that can help you explain how it should be. While 110 blocks MAY be ok, keep in mind as we start using and certifying Cat6 that you will need a Cat6 compliant system end to end.
Good Luck It is only my opinion, based on my experience and education...I am always willing to learn, educate me!
Daron J. Wilson, RCDD
daron.wilson@lhmorris.com
You can refer to the EIA/TIA 568 standards, or there are numberous interpretations of those standards (usually every vendor has this data in the back of their catalog on structured wiring) that can help you explain how it should be. While 110 blocks MAY be ok, keep in mind as we start using and certifying Cat6 that you will need a Cat6 compliant system end to end.
Good Luck It is only my opinion, based on my experience and education...I am always willing to learn, educate me!
Daron J. Wilson, RCDD
daron.wilson@lhmorris.com
- Status
