Cat6 unshielded cable and power cable crosstalk

Would running unshielded cat6 cable enclosed in flexible conduit close to indoors 2.5 power cable be sufficient to minimise crosstalk/interference?

I did buy cat6 shielded cable to do this work but I came across a problem trying to connect to the shielded modular plugs where the cables are too thick to go through the holes of the plugs. I have tried three different makes of plugs with no success.

Whilst not the most helpful of replies .... just to point out, crosstalk will only be an issue in cables where other digital signals are present on pairs within the same cable.

Interference, that's a different matter.

What actual issue are you trying to resolve by what you are proposing ?

I have not yet run any cables but I am starting to tomorrow.

By your definition crosstalk is then not an issue here.

I have no alternative but to run some cables in a cupboard where there is a consumer unit and the cat6 cables will be running about a foot away of electrical cables and the consumer unit itself.

Cat5E and Cat6 without extra shielding are usually happy in what are pretty bad RF environments so long as the lengths are under the 100m limit

Or put another way, when running stuff around muddy festival sites you have no choice to share cable runs with audio/rf/fibre/power and other than crimping on bad ends did not have any issues

That is reassuring. I have had a 40m run of cat5e through two floors and an attic without problems. I have already run a cat6 alongside the cat5e for the new installation to connect a Ubiquity NanoBeam as an Access point so hopefully this won't be an issue.

I am fitting another Ubiquity NanoBeam as a station on an adjacent building 30m away and this is where the cat6 cable will have to be run close to electrical cables and fluorescent light fittings which is why I asked the question.

In reply to a post by scopio:

I did buy cat6 shielded cable to do this work but I came across a problem trying to connect to the shielded modular plugs where the cables are too thick to go through the holes of the plugs. I have tried three different makes of plugs with no success.

Are you not terminating your cables with RJ45 socket faceplates?

If you do go with shielded cable I think best practise is connect shield to ground at one end only to avoid group return loops. This would be the end nearest the main grounding point as in a "star" grounding layout. Also I think regs state that you should run your networking cables in a separate conduit than mains voltage. Hopefully other people can confirm/refute this before you pull cable.

You can reduce interference by crossing mains cables perpendicularly but maybe the option to do that is limited judging by your post. As a side-thought, I wonder how much interference one of those HomePlugs would generate on a parallel-running mains cable.

I can empathize with your RJ45 plug frustration having gone through many different plugs as well but I did eventually find shielded plugs that did accept fatter cat6 so they are out there!

However, we're nearly into 2018 so why not be the envy of your neighbours and do it properly by installing fibre? "Yes, I have FTTP - fibre to my privy" No interference issues plus attaching a short patch cable can double as an emergency laser toy for the cat! [joke and legal disclaimer icons go here]

[Edit: separate conduit note and reducing interference paragraph]

Edited by deleted (Fri 13-Oct-17 09:27:56)

Thank you for your response and constructive suggestions.
Had I put more thought into this project, yes I would have terminated the cables to faceplates. I am a retired novice at this kind of work and had I seen your response a couple of weeks before I would have done it as you suggest but not with fibre as I know nothing about working with fibre.

My great disappointment was that after buying different cat6 modular plugs from different sources and some @ £20 for a pack of 10 from EZ that claim to be suitable, I could not use them as the individual pairs would just not fit through the holes in the plugs and had to use cat6 UTP inserted into flexible conduit and EZ through modular plugs.

Anyway I have now finished the installation and I am pleased that at present all is well achieving over 16Mbps wired on ADSL+2 at 40m away from the BT Hub 3.

Thank you for your input which I will bear in mind if I ever have to do a similar project again which I doubt.
Edited typo.

Edited by deleted (Fri 13-Oct-17 12:28:46)

Regardless of crosstalk, 240v cables should not be run in close proximity to 'other services'.

There is the possibility of voltage spikes appearing on cables not intended to carry it.

There are even specific sections in the wiring regulations covering this.

I will have to rerun some of the cat6 cables as I have come across a serious issue!

In one of the rooms in the roof space the cat6 cables seem to be too close to eight four tube fluorescent light fittings, so when the lights are switched off I get 16Mbps but when they are switched on the download speed go down to 1.6Mbps! Hence I will run the cat6 cables as far from the light fittings as possible.

Would I be right in thinking this is the start of the work decided on as a result of this July thread?

If so it may help people understand the overall topography .

Hi RobertoS, you have a very good memory, yes you are correct!
I will in the next few days may be take one or two photos of installation and explain further what the difficulties and results were. In the meantime this is what we decided that the best method to get internet to the remote building was by installing two Ubiquiti NBE-5AC-16 NanoBeam AC Outdoor 5GHz 16dBi WiFi Point-to-Point Link Kit (450Mbps AC) mounted on J poles.
We played with the idea of suggestions from members of this forum to extend a cable on catenary wire from one building to the other but it meant having to dig a small trench on a tarmac drive and a block paved area at the entrance to the remote building to drive ground rods to connect the surge protectors for the Cat6 cable and the catenary wire as there was no easy way to connect the ground wires.
On advice from CS at Ubiquity (USA) the Ubiquiti NBE-5AC-16 NanoBeam did not need to be grounded as the NanoBeams have protection against ESD within its circuitry, so the powers to be decided to install the NanoBeams. That was one issue solved, the second issue has been as my post above we have been unable to purchase RJ45 shielded modular plugs that the shielded Cat6 cable pairs would fit into the holes! We purchased from three different sources in Amazon, some very expensive ones but to my disappointment none fitted the Cat6 shielded pairs! If anyone here knows where I could lay my hands on proved RJ45 shielded modular plugs that will fit the cat6 pairs I would appreciate if they could let me know. As a consequence I have had to use Cat6 UTP cable in flexible conduit.
The only issue now is that I will have to rerun the cables in one particular room to distance the cables further from fluorescent light fittings as when the lights are on the download speed drops fro 16Mbps to 1.6Mbps!
Diagram of the installation (bear in mind that the cat6 cable is now UTP and not shielded)!; https://s19.postimg.org/r7ntbcgrn/Amended_diagram_af...
Edited typo.

Edited by deleted (Sun 15-Oct-17 13:08:55)

As stated in my previous post here are photos of the actual installation of the Ubiquity NanoBeams.
Position of the access point radio;
https://s19.postimg.org/upr2zih83/P1000413.jpg

Position of the station radio 30m from the access point radio;
https://s19.postimg.org/9hdei7ksj/P1000414.jpg

Electrical cupboard in the remote building where the POE injector for the station radio is situated. I have not noticed any issues with between the injector and the electrical equipment and the download speed at this position is a steady 16Mbps.
https://s19.postimg.org/v3sezm1gz/P1000411.jpg

This is where the issue arises but only when the fluorescent lights are switched on the download speed goes from 13/16Mbps to 1.6Mbps but not when the lights are switched off! I will re-rote the cat6 above this ceiling as far away from the light fittings as possible to solve the issue.
https://s19.postimg.org/gojorx89f/P1000412.jpg

This is a really interesting thread! But some aspects I find confusing...

In reply to a post by scopio:

having to dig a small trench on a tarmac drive and a block paved area at the entrance to the remote building to drive ground rods

I've never had to dig a trench to drive in a ground rod before, only whack them in using the pointy end. Maybe you'd have to remove a brick from your paved area or drill a pilot hole through tarmac but a trench? Is the trench to re-discover/check for soil pipes?

In reply to a post by scopio:

On advice from CS at Ubiquity (USA) the Ubiquiti NBE-5AC-16 NanoBeam did not need to be grounded as the NanoBeams have protection against ESD within its circuitry

Based on the MikroTik kit I've installed I thought the grounding of the J tubes was for lightning protection and separate to the (remote) grounding of the cat6 cable for RF interference reduction? The NanoBeams might have ESD protection but if the J poles aren't grounded then surely this just shunts the issue to the cable thus potentially destroying the kit at the other end of the cat6 cable? I guess I'm surprised to hear the opposite advice from Ubiquity than from MikroTik.

In reply to a post by scopio:

the second issue has been as my post above we have been unable to purchase RJ45 shielded modular plugs that the shielded Cat6 cable pairs would fit into the holes! We purchased from three different sources in Amazon, some very expensive ones but to my disappointment none fitted the Cat6 shielded pairs! If anyone here knows where I could lay my hands on proved RJ45 shielded modular plugs that will fit the cat6 pairs I would appreciate if they could let me know.

I'll go search my emails for purchase history but in the meantime, if it helps, the ones that worked for me were 2-part with pre-loading guide.

Having tried all three methods, suspended wire, wireless link and buried cable, I've had best results with buried cable followed by suspended wire generally because there's no on-going maintenance like trimming trees and RF interference.

Keep posting with updates please!

I have posted in different forums including Ubiquity Forum where the regular and experienced installers of these equipment often post trying to clarify the need to ground these two NanoBeams and whilst it is recommended if the radios are fitted on a mast for my situation where the J poles are only 20 inches long and 3 meters off the ground driving a ground rod seems an over kill. After all there are 100,000s if not millions of TV aerials and Digital dishes on the top of buildings all over the country which have no surge protectors or grounding which are more likely to be hit by a direct lightning strike for which there is no protection. Fitting a lightning protector would only protect from the high energy bursts. The only advice that I had was to connect the lightning protector to the earthing block in the consumer unit if I was that worried about lightning strikes.
As for

having to dig a small trench on a tarmac drive and a block paved area at the entrance to the remote building to drive ground rods

The grounding is as you say for protecting the J poles but also the radios and the equipment beyond as the lightning protectors have two RJ45 ports, one from the radio to the protector and one from the protector to the LAN. The shielding cable is for RF interference reduction and nothing to do with lightning protection. Of course these manufacturers sell lightning protectors and they would advice the fitting of them to make a sale!
The grounding rod would have to be driven at least 12 inches away from the building wall in order to avoid hitting the foundations and then again there are sewage pipes that may be running where the rod is to be driven, although in my case other services such as water, gas and electrical services are well away from where the rods would have been driven. Had I driven a ground rod and the reading would not have been favourable I would have to drive extra rods 6 feet apart with inspection covers and a trench to join the rods and run the earth strap/cable to the lightning protectors.
Whatever we do nothing is going to protect anything from a direct lightning strike all we can do is try to protect the equipment from a lightning burst or take a risk and hope that the lightning strike is miles away from us.