Telephone Circuit
- Thread starter Duuuuug
- Start date
- Status
arjo_reich
Member
Re: Telephone Circuit
The new standard for telephone wiring is CAT 5e however it is only rated up to 100 meters / 300 feet. That is an interesting question...
justdavemamm
Senior Member
- Location
- Rochester NY
Re: Telephone Circuit
The 100 meter (suggested) limit for CAT5 is for ethernet data transmissions.
The 100 meter (suggested) limit for CAT5 is for ethernet data transmissions.
arjo_reich
Member
Re: Telephone Circuit
Although I'm sure your right, analog phone signals would likely be much more tolerant than delicate network packets.
That's true enough although I throught it was a metric of attenuation over the distance of the line...which would apply in similar ways to telephones.
Although I'm sure your right, analog phone signals would likely be much more tolerant than delicate network packets.
hbiss
EC, Westchester, New York NEC: 2014
- Location
- Hawthorne, New York NEC: 2014
- Occupation
- EC
Re: Telephone Circuit
No, 800 ft is nothing. And there is no reason to use CAT5. 24 awg CAT3 is fine.
Now, I'm going to throw a monkey wrench into the "CAT5 for everything" camp. I've heard a few times now that for POTS carrying DSL, CAT5 is not recommended because it has a detrimental effect on the DSL carrier. This is due to the increased pair capacitance caused by the tight twists. CAT3 is the recommendation.
I would think that relatively short lengths would not make much difference but for longer runs it may. We all know (or should) that bridge taps on a line carrying DSL are a big no-no. Even one or two can really slow things down.
Just something to think about.
-Hal
[ July 29, 2005, 11:10 AM: Message edited by: hbiss ]
No, 800 ft is nothing. And there is no reason to use CAT5. 24 awg CAT3 is fine.
Now, I'm going to throw a monkey wrench into the "CAT5 for everything" camp. I've heard a few times now that for POTS carrying DSL, CAT5 is not recommended because it has a detrimental effect on the DSL carrier. This is due to the increased pair capacitance caused by the tight twists. CAT3 is the recommendation.
I would think that relatively short lengths would not make much difference but for longer runs it may. We all know (or should) that bridge taps on a line carrying DSL are a big no-no. Even one or two can really slow things down.
Just something to think about.
-Hal
[ July 29, 2005, 11:10 AM: Message edited by: hbiss ]
Re: Telephone Circuit
The time-worn local loop between the phone and the central office is often measured in miles. It carries maybe 50mA of DC loop current plus 3KHz of voice, tone (DTMF) dialing, and modem signals.
When they installed my DSL service, they replaced the drop cable, split the signals at the demarc box and ran a home run to the computer using the extra pair for the DSL signal which travels most of the way from the CO on fiber.
We are talking transmission lines here, and taps are generally forbidden unless steps are taken to maintain impedance match.
The time-worn local loop between the phone and the central office is often measured in miles. It carries maybe 50mA of DC loop current plus 3KHz of voice, tone (DTMF) dialing, and modem signals.
When they installed my DSL service, they replaced the drop cable, split the signals at the demarc box and ran a home run to the computer using the extra pair for the DSL signal which travels most of the way from the CO on fiber.
We are talking transmission lines here, and taps are generally forbidden unless steps are taken to maintain impedance match.
- Status