ᐅ Multiswitch for Satellite TV: Install in the Attic or Basement?

Created on: 31 May 2016 19:34
W
world-e
Hello everyone,

What are your thoughts on the best location for installing the satellite multiswitch? Does it make more sense to place it in the unheated attic space or in the technical room in the basement?
The house will have two full floors with a shallow pitched roof (unheated attic) and a basement.

Advantages of the attic:
- Less signal loss, since the multiswitch is close to the satellite dish
- Less cabling effort, as most connections are on the upper floor (3x twin outlets). This allows the rooms to be connected directly. Ground floor (2x twin), basement (1x twin)
- Satellite cables between the multiswitch and the satellite dish are easier to replace if they fail after several years

Advantages of the basement:
- Fewer penetrations through the vapor barrier in the top floor ceiling
- All technical equipment is located in the basement technical room

Thank you for your opinions and suggestions.
D
Dipol
2 Jun 2016 01:06
Bieber0815 schrieb:
Is this conclusion really necessary? Why shouldn’t a central communication distribution point also be located in the attic?

This concerns me because I am buying a house with satellite wiring from the developer. I would like to know where the multiswitch should or may be located.

The non-safety-relevant parts of DIN 18015 are also subject to modification.

For a standalone satellite system in a single-family house, the location in the attic is more common, while in a multi-family building the basement is more often preferred.

Neither option is a construction error; however, the still common but non-compliant installation of foundation and ring grounding by the shell construction companies is. In my opinion, the question of whether the antenna grounding conductor is routed inside as a lightning conductor or outside without dangerous proximity is more relevant than whether the multiswitch is installed in the attic or the basement.
B
Bieber0815
2 Jun 2016 06:45
Dipol schrieb:
the still common but non-compliant installation of foundation and ring beams by the structural shell contractors, however.

So, does that mean 99 out of 100 single-family houses currently being built are defective?
S
Sebastian79
2 Jun 2016 07:39
According to Dipol, this will be the case — and is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.
Uwe822 Jun 2016 08:22
Dipol schrieb:
That’s complete nonsense!

Cable network operators prefer triple-shielded cables with shielding attenuation and coupling resistance rated honestly as Class A+, but they also accept existing cables that are double-shielded, solid copper cables with proven Class A. The values can always be better. Shielding attenuation of 100 dB is technically achievable even with double shielding. Already, Class A reduces interference emissions and system emissions to harmless, minimal levels; more is not necessary.

Thank you, you are absolutely right. A friend told me this a few days ago because a UM employee refused to connect his internal line for precisely these reasons. After your post, I thought about it and it really is nonsense.

Thanks for the correction.
D
Dipol
2 Jun 2016 09:15
Bieber0815 schrieb:
So does that mean 99 out of 100 single-family homes currently being built are defective?

I’m not sure if that ratio is accurate. The fact is, the changes introduced with DIN 18014:2007-09 are still too recent for all parties involved in construction, including many electrical professionals, to be fully aware of them.

However, there are also architects who are familiar even with the latest version of the standard from 2014-03 but find it too inconvenient to specify the grounding system properly in the electrical scope of work in time.