1 members (Scott35),
53
guests, and
28
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
OP
Member
|
Often, if we do not do the total install, we will get the winning bid for Electrical, which will often include some conduit for Tel/Data. So many of them have what I think is a far fetched interpitation of some of the telecom standards of pulling in conduit. i.e. The 2 90 rule... they wont pull in more than 180 degrees of bend, reguardless of fill.
So yesterday the Cablers show up, and I have to tell them the Arch would not allow extra pull boxes in some of the closed walls, and some of them have 3 90's His reply was, "We won't pull it! It damages the cable. And it's code." My reply, "What Code, I challenge you to find one." He only has 3 cat 5e cables in these 3/4" conduits, so I say, "Try some lube." His reply, "Oh, that damages the cable jackets too."
I have an idea where this comes from, an outdated TIA 568 standard (Not a Code) that was a little far fetched, and didn't differentiate fiber optic from copper cabling.
Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on this?
Mark Heller "Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 4,294
Member
|
Mark, I'm not at all familiar with the standards, but can tell you that the 180° "dream world" predates the use of fiber optics. I can remember hearing about it in '70.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
OP
Member
|
Here I was thinking it was new.... I was born in '70!
Mark Heller "Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 507
Member
|
I have seen this often in specs. but I've never seen anyone get bent about it.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 23
Member
|
well i would rather not have alot of J-Boxes in my big backbone and interduct pulls you can always put another wrap on the tugger and use Lots of Lube. sounds like pure lazyness to me
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 507
Member
|
I would be interested to hear if anyone has actually ever damaged a cat 5 cable due to excess pull strain and under what conditions that occurred?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 625
Member
|
Would you even know if you'd damaged it? You'd probably have to ping it out with a TDR to find out. With the error-recovery mechanisms built into comm protocols, the user likely isn't going to realize what's going on, either--he'll just have slower network performance than he would have had if there was no damage.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,876
OP
Member
|
Graphic TDR it would still be realy difficult to tell I think, unless you printed out each pair before you pulled as a refferance. I'm sure someone with too much time on thier hands can cut to length test and install to check it again, like in some testing lab. However I can say that most Certification meters will test exactly the same before and after. (With the same termination.) With pulling tension of 25lbs max, you could bundle a dozen or so and swing like Tarzan..... Kidding
Mark Heller "Well - I oughta....." -Jackie Gleason
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 349
Member
|
Here at the large public agency I work for in the Los Angeles area, when we award contracts for the installation of conduit to be used for data lines, we specify no more than 2-90's between openings. Nothing to do with code. Our IT techs who pull in the cabling later (fiber or cat-5) don't care if the openings are pull boxes or condulets, they just want easy pulling. Personally I don't think they have a tugger available, and wouldn't know how to use one (they aren't wiremen).
Radar
There are 10 types of people. Those who know binary, and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 886
Member
|
Don't think you would want to use a tugger with those cables.
Personally I think the "2 90" requirement is silly. I can't imagine how you could comply in many situations. No reason that you can't upsize the conduit and use a lubricant if necessary. Never heard of a lubricant damaging a cable by the way.
Maybe you need to rethink allowing IT techs with no experience doing this type of work.
-Hal
|
|
|
Posts: 201
Joined: April 2004
|
|
|
|