Cat 5 & Coaxial

ethernet

It's not possible with fast ethernet. Regular 10Mb ethernet would work if it's a 50 ohm cable, but regular coax is 75 ohms, and will give you great grief if you use it. Stick with wireless or else pull regular cat5e cable between the two places.

Crud, I was afraid of that. I will keep working on the wireless solution.

Thanks for the info..

V

Wats> > I want to use the existing coaxial connections in my house that is for

"vm" wrote in news:1108250096.948508.69230 @l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

Check muxlab.com

The TV coaxial cable that was built to into the house is most propably 75 ohm coaxial cable. I don't know any produxt that runs fast Ehternet (100 Mbit/s) over it, but there are several wayus how 10 Mbit/s Ethernet could run over it.

One idea would be try to find some really old thin Ethernet product that can be configured to both standard 50 ohm wiring and also for 75 ohm wiring. Those products have existed, but I haven't seen them available for many years.

There are some companies that adapt 10Base-T Ethernet to

75 ohm coaxial cable. Take a look at those links:

I just found a chart that shows TW coax (RG58) at 1.1 db/M attenuation at 1800GHz. (it's worse at 2.4GHz) That's 200 db down from about 200 mw. I don't think it'll work

It would have to be "g" wifi to be faster than what he's got now.

There is a bunch of faster wide area radio neworking standards coming, isn't there ? At some point the OP will be able to set up a couple small discs and be done with it.

There is laser point-to-point equipment if he's got line of sight. All it takes is money.

I say pull fiber. He's already paid for the expensive part; the conduit. It's a good asset.

Commonly used coax, including that used for TV, has very high loss at WiFi frequencies (2.4 or 5 GHz).

In article , vm writes

All..

Lateral thinking..

Could the co-ax be used to get the wireless signal up the building to another aerial? - Not sure of frequencies we are talking here.

May be enough signal to get a connection?

Thoughts?? Phil Partridge snipped-for-privacy@pebbleGRIT.demon.co.uk Remove the grit to reply

The 2.4 GHz wireless signal is too high a freq for that coax. The losses would be so great that the signal would be rapidly attenuated. The coax has a difficult time with UHF TV signals at the highest end at

800 MHz.; wireless would be three times this high.

vm

First off, TV coax isn't RG-58 which is 50 ohms, it's usually 75 ohm cable, typically RG-59 or RG-6. And I think you meant 1800MHz, or

1.8GHz, _not_ 1800GHz.

But I agree that it probably won't work.

[snip]

Laser is expensive, and it's also prone to outages caused by rain and fog.

Here's a cheap optical system that a guy made that can go a half mile or so and is a good way to keep you busy for the winter months.

I talked to a guy that had something to do with that project. It's neat. DIY and Open Source hardware.

I may have mixed up two threads. One guy aready ahd a 600 ft TW (RG58) connection in conduit beteen two buildings. I thought this was a question about connecting WiFI gear to his coax.

That a really high frequency. Perhaps you meant 1.8 GHz?

The coaxial cable used for cable TV connections is not RG-58. RG-58 is 50 ohm coaxial cable used for other radio applications.

Cable TV systems and TV antenna systems are built using 75 ohm coaxial cable. Generally the traditional cable for video installations has been RG-59, RG-11, RG-6 and TELLU 13. RG-59 is the default cale for many not so demanding antenna wiring applications and for baseband video. For a good quality antenna cable wiring quad-shielded all-copper center conductor RG-6 cable is recommended. You can find some 75 ohm coaxial cable data at

Those are geenrally lower loss cables than the RG-58 you mentioned. The problem in using then for WiFi applications is that the cable is 75 ohm, while WiFi equipment and antennas are designed for 50 ohm cable.

It's 50ohm cable used for ethernet. Before 10baseT came out, 90% of ethernet ran over rg-58

1800Ghz? AWSOME! Infrared over coax!

LOL.

The only problem, is the cable tends to run a bit warm. ;-)

That's also true.

You might try connecting a wire from the center conductor of the coax and wrapping it around wireless devices at both ends.

The loss in the cable will be high, but it should be less than through walls and such. You probably don't want to actually connect it to the antenna terminals, if any, but just wrap it around the device.

-- glen