Cat 5 Cable for Underground Conduit Question

[John in OH]

I wish to install several runs of Cat 5 cable through an underground conduit (80ft.) to my new garage/workshop. The following cable is available on eBay described as: Enhanced CAT 5E UTP LAN CABL. Does anyone know if this would be suitable for the underground conduit application? If not, what cable rating should I be looking for?

 

[DodgeZ]

look for OUTDOOR DIRECT BURIAL

 

[royalton10]

Try www.monoprice.com They are in California, speedy shipppers to Ohio. I have ordered speakers, speaker wire, etc from them. Things arrive in Ohio in 3-5 days.

Not sure if they have the wire mentioned above.

Good luck!

John - How does the new garage in Va?

Doug

 

[BrianAltenhofel]

Yes, it's perfectly fine.

I avoid anything direct burial like the plague. Way too many underground critters have caused way too many issues. Plus, run in sufficiently large conduit, it's easier to just pull another cable, and it's more difficult to accidentally break a line doing digging work in the area.

 

[mrb]

Yes, it's perfectly fine.

I avoid anything direct burial like the plague. Way too many underground critters have caused way too many issues. Plus, run in sufficiently large conduit, it's easier to just pull another cable, and it's more difficult to accidentally break a line doing digging work in the area.

you need to use the underground direct burial cable even when running u/g in conduit. the jacket on regular cat5 is not waterproof and over time you will have problems. That said I have used regular cat5 in u/g runs, knowing that I may have a failure, and it has worked fine.

if you have lightning you want to use building entrance protectors on each end of the run.

 

[Interex]

Just a note on Cat 5 - if you're looking to run it simply for computer networking purposes, you can just use 1 cable to go from your router in the house to a switch (hub) in the garage. You can then run all your drops to the garage switch instead of running them all back into the house.

 

[nehog]

I wish to install several runs of Cat 5 cable through an underground conduit (80ft.) to my new garage/workshop. The following cable is available on eBay described as: Enhanced CAT 5E UTP LAN CABL. Does anyone know if this would be suitable for the underground conduit application? If not, what cable rating should I be looking for?

Cable specifications decoded:

Enhanced (slightly better)
Cat 5e (Speed rating, Could be Cat 4, Cat 5 or Cat 6 too))
UTP (unshielded twisted pair, STP would be shielded twisted pair)
LAN (Local Area Network)
CABL (Cable)

Nothing in that specification says anything about burial. So what to do? Basically what you are thinking of doing: run in conduit. Stuff will fail eventually, but with conduit, you can just pull a new wire or two.

 

[big.jim]

i install cat5e in factories and we pull underground through plastic 4" ducts and never had any problems (we have laid runs upto 200feet) max length of run without a switch or router is 305feet (length of cable in a full box)

 

[4000xt]

May I suggest using wireless. Get two wireless N routers and use the one in the garage as an access point that connects to the one in the house. Would save any issues in the future with your cables under gound. If your signal is weak you could install a small outdoor antenna. This would be your best bet I think. May cost a little more in the end.

 

[bradweingartner]

May I suggest using wireless. Get two wireless N routers and use the one in the garage as an access point that connects to the one in the house. Would save any issues in the future with your cables under gound. If your signal is weak you could install a small outdoor antenna. This would be your best bet I think. May cost a little more in the end.

I'll take a wire any day of the week. When an 80ft range is considered plus siding, etc, Consumer Wifi isn't even an option for reliability. Best is to run the wire to the garage and have a Wifi access point out there. I hate dropping my connection when I bring the laptop in the car, or on the other side of the car, etc.

 

[4000xt]

I'll take a wire any day of the week. When an 80ft range is considered plus siding, etc, Consumer Wifi isn't even an option for reliability. Best is to run the wire to the garage and have a Wifi access point out there. I hate dropping my connection when I bring the laptop in the car, or on the other side of the car, etc.

Well I can't argure with wire but with the N technology nowadays it is a lot better g. And some of these new routers coming out signal strength is amazing. I also said an outdoor antenna would be a good idea as well.

 

[OccupantRJ]

Yes, it's perfectly fine.

I avoid anything direct burial like the plague. Way too many underground critters have caused way too many issues. Plus, run in sufficiently large conduit, it's easier to just pull another cable, and it's more difficult to accidentally break a line doing digging work in the area.

I'm with you, especially as cheap as PVC conduit is.

 

[Norcal]

Gel-filled Cat 5 cable is what is needed, it's a PITA to work with because of the gel but that is the price one pays.

 

[BrianAltenhofel]

Well I can't argure with wire but with the N technology nowadays it is a lot better g. And some of these new routers coming out signal strength is amazing. I also said an outdoor antenna would be a good idea as well.

At least in Oklahoma, it's not very cost effective to run wireless between buildings between wind, rain, hail, lightning strikes, etc. even with high end equipment. Been there, done that, found it more cost effective even to run fiber. He's not going to be carrying a ton of traffic, so CAT5E or CAT6 will work just fine for him.

 

[Plump]

I wanted to run cable to the garage as well but my AV guy convinced me to go the wireless route as well. Get a wireless-N router and there isn't anything I can do where I would run out of bandwidth. Plus, I can work in the yard or anywhere in the house as a bonus and not worry about wire failure, digging, burying, etc. Just my two cents.

 

[Gooch]

i install cat5e in factories and we pull underground through plastic 4" ducts and never had any problems (we have laid runs upto 200feet) max length of run without a switch or router is 305feet (length of cable in a full box)

everytime i've bought a box of Cat5/Cat5e or cat6 it's been 1000ft boxes.

 

[89GLH]

Like any conduit runs, try to add an extra run or two in case something goes wrong with your mains. I have 3 cables run out to a shed and only 1 is hooked up, the other 2 as backup. 1000ft of CAT6 was only $100 or so, WAY faster than N. More reliable too.

 

[4000xt]

Like any conduit runs, try to add an extra run or two in case something goes wrong with your mains. I have 3 cables run out to a shed and only 1 is hooked up, the other 2 as backup. 1000ft of CAT6 was only $100 or so, WAY faster than N. More reliable too.

I have to disagree with you on running a wire would be faster. With most routers you are only getting 100mbit a sec on each port and with N you are getting 150 - 300mbit a sec depending on the router type. The only way you would go faster if you had gigbit ports on the router.

 

[Motofixxer]

I would suggest running a minimum of 3 runs of Cat5e minimum. 1 for general use, plug in a Wifi router and your good to go. 1 to use as a phone line or something, and 1 as an extra. More is better especially at the price of the wire now. Extra runs give you the option of running a camera with a monitor\DVR in the house. Or other security sensors tied in with the house. Also make sure to over size your conduit so you can add more later.

 

[BrianAltenhofel]

I have to disagree with you on running a wire would be faster. With most routers you are only getting 100mbit a sec on each port and with N you are getting 150 - 300mbit a sec depending on the router type. The only way you would go faster if you had gigbit ports on the router.

The best performance I've seen in two-way communication with Wireless-N in the real world was 85mbps - in the same room. Theoretical speeds are great, but they just don't happen.

As for "most routers getting 100mbps", you can buy consumer gigabit switches all day at Walmart for $30-$70 and consumer WiFi routers with gigabit switches all day for $60-$100.

If it were me, I'd run the CAT6 and be done with it. If your cable run is under 121ft total, you're good for 10gbps if you decide to adopt that technology. (CAT6A is needed for runs longer than that if you want 10gbps, but you can still go 300ft for 10/100/1000.)

 

[Zebu Fellenz]

If it were me, I'd run the CAT6 and be done with it. If your cable run is under 121ft total, you're good for 10gbps if you decide to adopt that technology. (CAT6A is needed for runs longer than that if you want 10gbps, but you can still go 300ft for 10/100/1000.)

Brian,

I've been out of the networking loop since CAT5e was new and high tech and have a few questions.

I need to run a line between the house and the shop, I want the fastest line that's reasonably affordable as I do media streaming off a PC in the shop. The run is roughly 250' and I will be running conduit.

Is 10gbps different than Gigabit? Do I need CAT6e? All the PC's have 10/100/1000 network interface cards and I was planning to pickup a five port Gigabit switch for the house and a 16 port Gigabit switch for the shop. I'll then be running some Linksys WRT54G routers with DD-WRT connected to the switches for our wireless network.

Does this sound like a reasonable way to set it up?

Thanks,

Erik

 

[ishiboo]

Brian,

I've been out of the networking loop since CAT5e was new and high tech and have a few questions.

I need to run a line between the house and the shop, I want the fastest line that's reasonably affordable as I do media streaming off a PC in the shop. The run is roughly 250' and I will be running conduit.

Is 10gbps different than Gigabit? Do I need CAT6e? All the PC's have 10/100/1000 network interface cards and I was planning to pickup a five port Gigabit switch for the house and a 16 port Gigabit switch for the shop. I'll then be running some Linksys WRT54G routers with DD-WRT connected to the switches for our wireless network.

Does this sound like a reasonable way to set it up?

Thanks,

Erik

10gbps is 10 gigabit, or 10 times the speed of "gigabit" ethernet. Your computers/cards are all 1 gigabit, and Cat 5E is good to give you gigabit speeds at that distance. There is no 6e, either 6a or 7 are used for 10 gigabit ethernet... and you will need to go to 6a or 7 to run 10gig at that distance. That type of speeds on consumer devices are a long ways ahead, so I'd just run 5E if I were you.

Sounds like a great setup, the Warthog's are great routers and DD-WRT rocks.

 

[BrianAltenhofel]

10gbps is 10 gigabit, or 10 times the speed of "gigabit" ethernet. Your computers/cards are all 1 gigabit, and Cat 5E is good to give you gigabit speeds at that distance. There is no 6e, either 6a or 7 are used for 10 gigabit ethernet... and you will need to go to 6a or 7 to run 10gig at that distance. That type of speeds on consumer devices are a long ways ahead, so I'd just run 5E if I were you.

Sounds like a great setup, the Warthog's are great routers and DD-WRT rocks.

This.

With that set up I'd just compare the price when choosing CAT5E or CAT6 for gigabit ethernet. Sometimes you can run across a good deal on CAT6 where it's comparable in price (only a few $ more) to CAT5E. The only real advantage to CAT6 in your situation is that most of those cables have a plastic piece down the middle to keep the twisted pairs separate. It's slightly more difficult to pull around corners, but it sure does keep away the inevitable kink from twisting that might break a wire depending on where you're pulling. Generally, though CAT6 is 30-40% more, so CAT5E is the better bet.

Oh yeah, and definitely second the DD-WRT. ALL of my wireless routers at the house run it. Nothing like having seamless wireless coverage at both ends of the trailer and out in the garage.

 

[89GLH]

I have to disagree with you on running a wire would be faster. With most routers you are only getting 100mbit a sec on each port and with N you are getting 150 - 300mbit a sec depending on the router type. The only way you would go faster if you had gigbit ports on the router.

CAT6. Im not going to run all that cable for 100MB throughput. I also said I ran 6, not 5e. Wireless N is too unreliable around me, and too many script kiddies want to test their "knowledge" on my wifi.

 

[mrb]

no reason to run 6. all gigabit needs is 5E. 6 is more expensive, the connectors jacks and patch cables are more expensive, its bigger in diameter and more difficult to work with for no added benefit in 99% of applications.

 

[89GLH]

If youre running different connectors on your CAT6 cables you need to send me the link. Same with the patch cables and jacks. Only difference is the hardware, the outlets are all the same. Never seen a CAT6 jack and a CAT5e jack seperate. If you have, by all means enlighten us. It's also the same diameter and the same to work with as 5e.

Is the expense the only reason you look down on it? Don't run HDMI, the cables are too expensive. You can get the same picture from a coaxial cable, which 99% of us have. Same argument.

 

[DodgeZ]

The best performance I've seen in two-way communication with Wireless-N in the real world was 85mbps - in the same room. Theoretical speeds are great, but they just don't happen.

As for "most routers getting 100mbps", you can buy consumer gigabit switches all day at Walmart for $30-$70 and consumer WiFi routers with gigabit switches all day for $60-$100.

If it were me, I'd run the CAT6 and be done with it. If your cable run is under 121ft total, you're good for 10gbps if you decide to adopt that technology. (CAT6A is needed for runs longer than that if you want 10gbps, but you can still go 300ft for 10/100/1000.)

The problem with N is it comes in a bunch of different flavors. It isn't like A/B/G where it is a defined speed. N can be on 2.4 or 5 or both. Depend on if you are dual band (2.4 and 5) your speed can vary greatly. You can also run more channel width. If you are running the wider 40MHz channels on 5GHz you should be seeing more of a real world 170meg. This is way more then you need to stream video to a garage. So N speeds aren't same like the older stuff. WiFi is a very powerful tool and should be discredited. While a hard wire would be best for this solution WiFi will work also. I don't know if DD-WRT does a full dual band N bridge though.

As for the cheap routers at wally world or the likes... Just because they say 100 or 1000 on the port doesn't mean it will really do it. I am not talking about the switch part I am talking about getting out to the internet. Switching frames is fast and easy. Forwarding and routing packets through a NAT/PAT isn't. Folks that are getting these new super fast fiber internet connections are finding out their old routers can't pass the traffic fast enough.


If I was trenching already I'd go ahead and pull to cat6 runs out. If I wasn't trenching I'd do a wireless backhaul.


http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solution...94/ns348/ns767/farpointWLAN_strategies_wp.pdf

 

[DodgeZ]

If youre running different connectors on your CAT6 cables you need to send me the link. Same with the patch cables and jacks. Only difference is the hardware, the outlets are all the same. Never seen a CAT6 jack and a CAT5e jack seperate. If you have, by all means enlighten us. It's also the same diameter and the same to work with as 5e.

Is the expense the only reason you look down on it? Don't run HDMI, the cables are too expensive. You can get the same picture from a coaxial cable, which 99% of us have. Same argument.

I am not sure about mod plugs but patch panels and RJ45 jacks are rated for cat5e or cat6

 

[89GLH]

^ exactly my point

 

[ishiboo]

CAT6. Im not going to run all that cable for 100MB throughput. I also said I ran 6, not 5e. Wireless N is too unreliable around me, and too many script kiddies want to test their "knowledge" on my wifi.

5E does gigabit as does 6, at a cheaper price.

The wireless technology is independent of the method used to secure it... WPA2 on either N or G is the same level of security... not sure why you think N is less secure?

If youre running different connectors on your CAT6 cables you need to send me the link. Same with the patch cables and jacks. Only difference is the hardware, the outlets are all the same. Never seen a CAT6 jack and a CAT5e jack seperate. If you have, by all means enlighten us. It's also the same diameter and the same to work with as 5e.

Is the expense the only reason you look down on it? Don't run HDMI, the cables are too expensive. You can get the same picture from a coaxial cable, which 99% of us have. Same argument.

Jacks/plugs are rated, the quality ones usually have the rating right on them. The physical plug itself is the same - a cat6 plug will mate with a 5e jack and vice versa. For many installations it may not matter, like using 5 instead of 5e for gigabit runs.

Patch cables are the same - they're just pieces of cat__ with plugs on both ends.

There are reasons to choose component video and reasons to choose HDMI. A better comparison would be component+audio versus composite video... if you're only running SD content, there's little reason to run component versus some el-cheapo RCA cables on a single connection to a SD device, as it's more money for nothing more.

5E is capable of doing gigabit at that distance without a problem, so why spend more?

 

[914forme]

I did this cat 5e direct burial, add a lighting arrestor to each end, and run. Full Gig to the shop, my servers are down there. I have a separate wireless setup for the house and the shop, but the signal was to unreliable, trying to run off the Houses Wifi.

Regular cat 5 will last a long time in a conduit, but if it gets water in there you will be re-pulling the wire in short order. As it will corrode quickly. In reality if I can find it, I will be dropping fiber into the run. I have the pieces, just need the middle (fiber).

BTW, I have run temp Cat5 across the ground and it works for almost a six months exposed to Ohio weather. I don't recommend it, but I have done it.

 

[mrb]

If youre running different connectors on your CAT6 cables you need to send me the link. Same with the patch cables and jacks. Only difference is the hardware, the outlets are all the same. Never seen a CAT6 jack and a CAT5e jack seperate. If you have, by all means enlighten us. It's also the same diameter and the same to work with as 5e.

Is the expense the only reason you look down on it? Don't run HDMI, the cables are too expensive. You can get the same picture from a coaxial cable, which 99% of us have. Same argument.

cat6 absolutely does have different plugs. here is one http://www.idealindustries.com/media/pdfs/products/brochures/cat_6_mod_plug_brochure.pdf will a regular 8p8c work? yes on most cat6 cable, but then you wont have a cat6 installation and may as well have just used 5e

show me the benefit to using cat6 (for ethernet up to 1gb).

 

[DodgeZ]

^ exactly my point

Sorry by OR I mean cat5e for cat5e and cat6 for cat6. They are different tho you can use cat6 panels with cat5e wiring but it will only be cat5e rated.

Like most earlier cables, Category 6 cable contains four twisted wire pairs. Although it is sometimes made with 23 AWG wire, the increase in performance with Cat 6 comes mainly from better insulation; 22 to 24 AWG copper is allowed if the ANSI/TIA-568-B.2-1 performance specifications are met. Cat 6 patch cables are normally terminated in 8P8C modular connectors. Attenuation, NEXT (near end crosstalk), and PSNEXT (power sum NEXT) in Cat 6 cable and connectors are all significantly lower than Cat 5 or Cat 5e, which also uses 24 AWG wire.

The heavier insulation in some Cat 6 cables makes them too thick to attach to 8P8C connectors without a special modular piece, resulting in a technically out-of-compliance assembly.[citation needed]

Connectors use either T568A or T568B pin assignments; the choice is arbitrary provided both ends of a cable are the same.

If Cat 6 rated patch cables, jacks, and connectors are not used with Cat 6 wiring, overall performance is degraded to that of the cable or connector.[citation needed]

Because the conductor sizes are generally the same, Cat 6 jacks may also be used with Cat 5e cable.[c

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat6

 

[89GLH]

show me the benefit to using cat6 (for ethernet up to 1gb).

If you can justify the expense, go for it. Might as well move into a future industry standard if you have the means to do so. Most of the users here won't need HD over ethernet, and do not want to "pay all that extra" for cat6. To me that cost is negligible. Buy a sports car and beat everyone to death with "it'll still run on 87 octane."

 

[mrb]

If you can justify the expense, go for it. Might as well move into a future industry standard if you have the means to do so. Most of the users here won't need HD over ethernet, and do not want to "pay all that extra" for cat6. To me that cost is negligible. Buy a sports car and beat everyone to death with "it'll still run on 87 octane."

where does HD over ethernet need cat6? show me anything 10/100/1000 that requires cat6 (other than some esoteric devices such as HDMI over twisted pair which have nothing to do with ethernet)

streaming HD needs something like 6-10Mb. hardly a gig.

there will be nothing that comes out that requires cat6. the next step up is 6A which is an entire different beast.

the ONLY thing that calls for 6 is the short distance 10G but by the time that gets cheap we'll be using something else.

the only thing that is future proof is empty pipe. thats why everyone (and I am talking about huge commercial installations) is still using 5E -its all thats needed.

 

[BHR4CE1]

show me the benefit to using cat6 (for ethernet up to 1gb).

Perhaps a bit of "Future Proofing"?

 

[89GLH]

The federal government must not count as a huge commercial installation then. Nor do any of the connections at Terremark. Maybe they've just made a mistake paying all that money for cabling. You're right. CAT6 is useless.

 

[89GLH]

If I'm running multiple cables through one conduit, I'm going with 6, regardless of the cost difference. It was developed specifically to handle interference and longer runs, exactly what is happening in a run to a garage. 5e can run at gig speeds, but the key is consistency. Not going to debate the similarities of 5e and 6, no point. In IT though, you'll never see power and data in the same conduit.

Same pipe? With power? I'm going with the cable designed to limit external noise and interference, and also has a longer reach.

 

[ishiboo]

If you can justify the expense, go for it. Might as well move into a future industry standard if you have the means to do so. Most of the users here won't need HD over ethernet, and do not want to "pay all that extra" for cat6. To me that cost is negligible. Buy a sports car and beat everyone to death with "it'll still run on 87 octane."

A performance engine will run on 87 at reduced performance. 5e will do gigabit at gigabit speed.

If you're future-proofing, run 7 or 7a... or fiber. The issue is that by the time you need 10gigE at the garage, that non-direct-burial cable you ran in an underground conduit is due for replacement anyway.

 

[mrb]

The federal government must not count as a huge commercial installation then. Nor do any of the connections at Terremark. Maybe they've just made a mistake paying all that money for cabling. You're right. CAT6 is useless.

the government doesnt count as a huge commercial installation. its a government installation. Theyre probably using 6 to do 10G-E to the desk. They will be able to afford the cards and switches long before the rest of us.

Havent been in Terremark, but have been in over a dozen datacenters and carrier hotels, and many (if not most) are still running 5E. If 5E is good enough for someone with a fully loaded force10 (costing around what, 1.5 million?) then its good enough for any of our houses (running up through gig-E)

wow has this gotten OT

bottom line: 5E is all thats required for gig-e. you dont need 6. if you feel you do and want to, go ahead.