Broadband Related > Telephony Wiring + Equipment

running more than one adsl extension from a nte5 faceplate

(1/3) > >>

simo_petar:
Hi all,
awhile back I fitted a filtered NTE5 faceplate to the BT master socket in our house, and also hard-wired an ADSL extension cable from the terminals on the back of the faceplate to a downstairs room where the router is. The setup has been working great, all thanks to the great info I found on this site previously.

The office location is now about to move to another floor at the top of the house so I'd like to know if it's possible/the best way to run another cat5 cable carrying the adsl signal to another outlet point.

Is it OK to connect 2 pairs of wires to each IDC terminal in the faceplate ?
Should I add a junction box on the ADSL extension cable and branch off from there ?

For simplicities sake I know I could remove the old extension, but I'd like to have the option of having 2 points that I can use as required for the router.

Any help and opinions much appreciated ...

Black Sheep:
Hmm ?? good question about the possibility of a 'Teed' ADSL circuit. IE- 2 separate extensions. In all honesty, I'm not sure how, if at all, it would affect the circuit ?? Maybe B*Cat or Ezzer etc, might be able to enlighten us with 'reflection' thesis ??

Either way, I thought it worth pointing out, that OR no longer utilise the 'faceplate' with the two IDC connections that give scope to add a DSL extension socket,  exactly as you have it at the moment. We have to plug the RJ11 jack-plug directly into the SSFP (front plate), then fit the wiring and associated data-socket where requested to.

The reason being that there is no demarcation point as such for the DSL signal. In other words, (using your set-up as an example), you could accidentally damage the data-socket wiring, and be left unable to have a 'test socket' to try a router in, in order to isolate where the fault lies. OR therefore had to pick up the tab for what is effectively your wiring. It didn't take long for the bean-counters to revert back to the jack-plug type install, for data extensions. It may not look as aesthetic, but should a fault develop on your data extension, you at least have the opportunity to unplug it and connect your router direct to the master socket.

I realise I'm typing the word 'you', but I mean it as in the royal 'you'. Just so other readers of the forum are aware of protocols.  :)

As you seem up to the job, could you not install some kind of switching system to the two data-extentions, so that they are in-situ but not 'Teed' in ??   

burakkucat:
You should be aware that by connecting another xDSL extension to the relevant IDCs on the SSFP will result in a performance loss. This is due to the other extension, the one not currently in use, will act as a bridged tap [1][2][3] across the pair.

The simplest way to provision the xDSL service to the new office location would be to disconnect the existing extension pair from the SSFP and connect in the new extension. Just leave the old pair tucked away (and labelled) for possible future re-use.

For interest, two images of the Hlog graphs for the same circuit are attached. The first shows a bridged tap is present, the second shows the absence of the bridged tap.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_tap
[2] http://www.jdsu.com/ProductLiterature/sctpsbridgedtap_an_tfs_tm_ae.pdf
[3] http://documents.exfo.com/appnotes/anote233-ang.pdf

simo_petar:
Thanks both,
 very interesting data and common sense once you're informed :) I must admit i can't read the graphs to see the potential for fault, so any further enlightenment would be useful. But as I've had a stable and smooth connection running Over the last 18 months I'd obviously like to keep it that way. Re-wiring to the new extension seems a better way to go.

The RJ11 on the front of the faceplate is currently unused. I presume the same lack of termination happen if i plugged a 2nd extension through there ?

burakkucat:

--- Quote from: simo_petar on December 03, 2012, 09:58:06 PM ---The RJ11 on the front of the faceplate is currently unused. I presume the same lack of termination happen if i plugged a 2nd extension through there ?

--- End quote ---

Yes, you are correct.  :)

With regard to the graphs, there are two features which 'scream' "bridged tap" to an experienced eye. The first, most obvious one, is that 'valley' centred, in this case, on tone 1380. The other indicator is the pronounced 'roll' on the third section of the curve, tones 2800 - 3300 and 3900 - 4090.

Tone 1380 is equivalent to (1380 * 4.3125) + (4.3125 / 2) kHz = 5953 kHz. The impedance mismatch, caused by that bridged tap, is essentially producing a basic 'notch filter' tuned to 5.9 MHz.

(b*cat waves a paw, in a friendly fashion, in the direction of B*Sheep.  :angel:  )

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page