Hello!
Our construction started about 2.5 weeks ago, and we are currently planning the electrical system. We are wondering how to install internet in the house.
About the house:
The house is built using solid construction methods from Viebrockhaus. Radio waves barely pass through the ceiling between the ground floor (GF) and the upper floor (UF). On the UF, the interior walls are drywall with metal elements, which also blocks radio waves significantly.
For the ground floor:
We want to set up Wi-Fi with the router located in the utility room. This should provide coverage throughout the entire ground floor and help reduce electromagnetic pollution to some extent.
For the upper floor:
This question is more complex. We lean toward a LAN solution to minimize electromagnetic pollution.
Option 1: Run LAN cables through the empty conduits from the utility room to each room on the upper floor.
Option 2: Use powerline adapters (network over the electrical wiring).
-> We tend to choose the second option because there are more power outlets than LAN ports in each room. It is also somewhat cheaper, though the price difference is minor in a project of this scale.
What do you think? Will this solution work without problems, or are there limitations? Have you had any experience with this?
Thank you very much for your input.
Our construction started about 2.5 weeks ago, and we are currently planning the electrical system. We are wondering how to install internet in the house.
About the house:
The house is built using solid construction methods from Viebrockhaus. Radio waves barely pass through the ceiling between the ground floor (GF) and the upper floor (UF). On the UF, the interior walls are drywall with metal elements, which also blocks radio waves significantly.
For the ground floor:
We want to set up Wi-Fi with the router located in the utility room. This should provide coverage throughout the entire ground floor and help reduce electromagnetic pollution to some extent.
For the upper floor:
This question is more complex. We lean toward a LAN solution to minimize electromagnetic pollution.
Option 1: Run LAN cables through the empty conduits from the utility room to each room on the upper floor.
Option 2: Use powerline adapters (network over the electrical wiring).
-> We tend to choose the second option because there are more power outlets than LAN ports in each room. It is also somewhat cheaper, though the price difference is minor in a project of this scale.
What do you think? Will this solution work without problems, or are there limitations? Have you had any experience with this?
Thank you very much for your input.
B
Bauexperte24 Oct 2016 11:31Thank you @Peanuts74 and @Musketier for your responses and the brief off-topic discussion.
Edit: If @Knallkörper also replied to my question, thanks to him as well, although I hardly understood any of it ops:
Best regards, Bauexperte
Edit: If @Knallkörper also replied to my question, thanks to him as well, although I hardly understood any of it ops:
Best regards, Bauexperte
P
Peanuts7424 Oct 2016 12:53In general, the line carries both noise and interference signals (for example, introduced through poor shielding) as well as the useful signal. Both have a certain strength. The longer the cable, the weaker the useful signal becomes at the receiver’s end. For a good transmission, the useful signal must be significantly stronger than the interference. There are several ways to achieve this.
A shorter cable or a better one (with a larger cross-section) results in less attenuation of the useful signal. Better shielding reduces interference.
Both lead to a higher signal-to-noise ratio (the ratio between useful signal and interference).
That’s why there are different options or adjustments available.
This was a very simplified explanation for non-experts, so please don’t take it too literally!
A shorter cable or a better one (with a larger cross-section) results in less attenuation of the useful signal. Better shielding reduces interference.
Both lead to a higher signal-to-noise ratio (the ratio between useful signal and interference).
That’s why there are different options or adjustments available.
This was a very simplified explanation for non-experts, so please don’t take it too literally!
Peanuts74 schrieb:
Regarding the current usage, would it make a big difference if the cable had "only" 850 MBit/s instead of the specified 1 GBit/s due to a kink???A cable is not a garden hose.
A network cable contains 8 wires, all of which are necessary to achieve a transmission speed of 1 GBit/s. If one wire is damaged, it won’t work anymore. The standard for 100 MBit/s requires only four of the eight wires. However, all four are equally necessary to enable data transmission. If one of these is broken, Ethernet will fail completely.
K
Knallkörper24 Oct 2016 18:21I don’t think Peanuts meant a vein rupture with "Knick."
P
Peanuts7424 Oct 2016 18:57Knallkörper schrieb:
I don't think Peanuts74 meant a conductor break by "kink".Of course not, if the cable were torn into two pieces, it wouldn't work at all.
I meant that the conductors themselves are fine, but, for example, the shielding has a tear...
Peanuts74 schrieb:
Of course not, if the cable is torn into two pieces, nothing would work anyway. I meant that while the wires themselves are fine, for example, the shielding might have a tear...Okay, I understand. However, that is a rather unlikely type of fault. A tear in the foil shield (if one is present, depending on the cable type) naturally leads to increased interference at the damaged spot. The impact is likely minor or even unnoticeable, especially within the allowed cable lengths, unless devices like baby monitors and microwaves are placed very close by.
If you manage to tear the foil inside the cable, you probably have a bigger problem with the wires themselves than with the damaged foil.
Similar topics