I know it's not recommended or allowed by the NEC , but I'm wondering if anybody knows how likely I am to have problems if I run ethernet and AC (120 volt) in the same conduit for 20 meters....
thanks, Steve
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 12:12:13 -0800 (PST), seaweedsl wrote in :
Unlikely.
Unlikely to have technical problems BUT should there be a fire/injury and the insurance company finds out they will void your coverage.
Thanks guys. Being in Mexico, anything I do is safer than what's typical here. I just don't want extra trouble with my network installation !
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 15:53:53 -0600, "NotMe" wrote in :
If and only if they can make a reasonable case that it had something to do with the fire, which will almost certainly not be the case.
I have 240v and 100-base-T running alongside each other in several locations in the house. No issues.
I very much doubt that's true, unless they have an exclusion in their policy documentation. On what grounds would they do it?
: >Unlikely to have technical problems BUT should there be a fire/injury and : >the insurance company finds out they will void your coverage. : : If and only if they can make a reasonable case that it had something to : do with the fire, which will almost certainly not be the case.
Do you want to bet the farm on that presumption?
None at all if you run the Ethernet over fiber.
If not, don't whine if your fire insurance is void...
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 20:22:39 -0600, "NotMe" wrote in :
I would rely on it absent a specific exclusion.
hmmm - we ran the AC in the required conduit and metal boxes to totally contain the AC/fire gremlins.
The "low voltage" stuff in the drop/plenum ceiling was a little trickier... Either - it was the more expensive "plenum" cable, hung from the I-beams, or run inside a pipe/conduit just for physical protection and it would exit from the conduit at a patch panel on either end.
Same with the low voltage telco/phone wiring.... which you didn't mention.
: >: >Unlikely to have technical problems BUT should there be a fire/injury and : >: >the insurance company finds out they will void your coverage. : >: : >: If and only if they can make a reasonable case that it had something to : >: do with the fire, which will almost certainly not be the case. : >
: >Do you want to bet the farm on that presumption? : : I would rely on it absent a specific exclusion.
Anyone that believes you can't cheat an honest man has never dealt with a serious insurance claim.
And insurance company WILL bring in the hired guns for a big enough claim. Been there watched it happen.
plastic pipe (as a cable gude/conduit) or metal? Probably depends on whats okay for your area, in a rural area I used plastic pvc pipe and 3 wire romex, my buddy lived in town and the conduit was metal and used for a ground... I ran cat5/CATV/Phone/240VAC/etc in the non ground plastic pipe, but he couldn't in the metal one... side benefit, pvc pipe was way cheaper too! :)
In comp.dcom.cabling ps56k wrote in part:
What would a "problem" be for you?
In theory, ethernet and 60 Hz AC won't interfere with each other, so separation and isolation are irrelevant. Now, if that AC is going to some noisy electrics (arc welders) or to some sensitive equipment, there might be some interference.
But you are taking an unapproved risk and depriving others of a layer of protection. Break the insulation, either by a pulling scar or mechanical accident, and they are _much_ closer to a fatality. Do you want other people setting traps for you? Don't set them for them!
-- Robert
As far as I know, it will likely work fine.
As you say, not allowed by the NEC. Some time ago, I predicted that you could run ethernet with 240VAC common mode on the cable, but I never got around to trying it. (Also not allowed by the NEC.)
Use cable ties onto the outside of the conduit.
-- glen
I don't know about your insurance policy, but mine has no such exclusion.
Good for them. Luckily insurance companies are heavily regulated, and unless something is explicitly excluded, it's presumed included, with ambiguities typically favouring the insured under the presumption that an insurance company will have an army of lawyers to write their agreements, so any omission is one intentionally omitted.
Who knew? Add "NEC/insurance/fire marshal expert" to the long list...
This would be an American thing?
Don't think the UK equiv have the same level of paranoia.
Gruesome, and tricky if the conduit is underground !
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 05:02:05 -0800, DevilsPGD wrote in :
A great many homes aren't 100% to code, so if that were grounds for denying claims, then a great many fire insurance policies wouldn't be worth the paper they're printed on.
To deny coverage the insurance company would presumably have to show, absent a specific exclusion, that a fire was caused by something non-code, and even then, unless there was (other) evidence of negligence, I think it's far from certain the insurance company could get away with denying coverage in many (most?) states, if challenged.
There's little or no real risk from AC wiring and Ethernet cable in the same conduit assuming the fill limit isn't exceeded. To get the Ethernet cable into existing conduit without damage to the AC wires, it might make sense to replace the existing AC wires, pulling new AC wires along with the Ethernet cable in order to avoid any damage to the AC wires.
Caveat: I am not a lawyer, and this is just my own lay understanding, not legal advice. You should consult your own lawyer.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.