* Jim White, K4OJ <k4oj@tampabay.rr.com> [2003 Aug 06 06:07 -0500]:
> Is there any reason that I could NOT use these on my CTWin network?
>
> It seems like it would be easier than running multiple runs of
> cable...i.e. if I have two station on the same operating table this way
> I would only need to bring one CAT5 cable to that table, once it gets
> there these would split that cable run into two unique runs and then I
> could hook them up to each of the computers... I understand that I will
> also need another splitter and two "holes" on the router end.
Should work fine. It's no different than splitting the Cat-V cable into
two RJ-45 jacks which we do at work all the time. I just can't bear the
thought of four unused wires in our wiring runs.
> Whatcha think? Seems like I would save on the ferrites and connectors
> that two individual runs would require plus since I plan on pulling
> these through electrical conduit for enhanced shielding I would have
> half as many wires to pull!
There may be some advantage to running the Cat-V through metal conduit,
but to be a truly effective shield at RF you need to bond all the joints
plus ground it at a single point common to your station RF/protective
ground. However, since Ethernet uses two wires for each signal path,
common mode rejection exists which is quite effective at rejecting RF it
seems. I have a friend with networked computers and uses an amp with no
ill effects. I've never had a problem with my small shack network and
100 Watts to a wire antenna.
73, de Nate >>
--
Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB | "We have awakened a
Internet | n0nb@networksplus.net | sleeping giant and
Location | Bremen, Kansas USA EM19ov | have instilled in him
Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @ | a terrible resolve".
http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/ | - Admiral Yamamoto
|