Looking for a good PoE extender on the cheap

[KRC1023]

Hey all, I'm looking for a way to get an ethernet connection about 750 feet from one building to another. Obviously this is too far for a cat5e/cat6 cable, so the plan is to use 2 of these [1] things (or ones like them) in waterproof boxes on posts at the correct intervals on the way down the hill. My question is: Can a reasonably reliable PoE repeater be had for less money? Speed isn't really that much of a concern, as this is basically just providing an internet connection to my computer workshop. Additionally, the upstream connection is only a 4G modem (You know, living all of 6 miles out of town where there's no real internet service for *some* reason).

 

Fixed wireless is not an option either- too many trees (and a hill).

 

 

[1] https://www.amazon.com/TRENDnet-Gigabit-PoE-Repeater-TPE-E100/dp/B00SDFF6S0/ref=sr_1_2?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1472947591&sr=1-2&keywords=PoE+repeater

[JefferyD90]

5 minutes ago, KRC1023 said:

Hey all, I'm looking for a way to get an ethernet connection about 750 feet from one building to another. Obviously this is too far for a cat5e/cat6 cable, so the plan is to use 2 of these [1] things (or ones like them) in waterproof boxes on posts at the correct intervals on the way down the hill. My question is: Can a reasonably reliable PoE repeater be had for less money? Speed isn't really that much of a concern, as this is basically just providing an internet connection to my computer workshop. Additionally, the upstream connection is only a 4G modem (You know, living all of 6 miles out of town where there's no real internet service for *some* reason).

 

Fixed wireless is not an option either- too many trees (and a hill).

 

 

[1] https://www.amazon.com/TRENDnet-Gigabit-PoE-Repeater-TPE-E100/dp/B00SDFF6S0/ref=sr_1_2?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1472947591&sr=1-2&keywords=PoE+repeater

Go optical.  Trust me... it will cost about twice as much, but then you wont have any fancy situation and it will be SUPER future proof.

[KRC1023]

1 hour ago, JefferyD90 said:

Go optical.  Trust me... it will cost about twice as much, but then you wont have any fancy situation and it will be SUPER future proof.

Looked into that. How do I terminate it? Also, it seems like running that system would be expensive, as I'd have to have a computer with a PCIe slot running permanently at both ends. Add to that the cost of buying the network cards, and it seems like a really really expensive option.

 

..Plus I don't have 2 extra computers.

[Donut417]

2 minutes ago, KRC1023 said:

Looked into that. How do I terminate it? Also, it seems like running that system would be expensive, as I'd have to have a computer with a PCIe slot running permanently at both ends. Add to that the cost of buying the network cards, and it seems like a really really expensive option.

 

..Plus I don't have 2 extra computers.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA29J1035274 

 

This is just the first one I found, you might be able to get a cheaper one. But converting the fiber at each end is possible and not insanely expensive as you might think. 

 

Id be concerned with the Ethernet repeater being outside. 

[mariushm]

So if you do plan to use ethernet cable, you're looking at something like this  : 

 

BUILDING B1 :  ------ 250 feet ---------- node N1 -------------250 feet---------- node N2 ------------250 feet ------- BUILDING B2

 

Basically your problem is the 100 meter limitation of the ethernet cables.

 

Those things you linked to require a 48v DC adapter which is optional, I don't think the product on the Amazon page includes it so I think you're looking at another $25 just for the 48v DC adapter. So probably about 95$ for each unit.

Then, the problem is that if you put one of those in each B1 and B2  you manage to push the ethernet signal and 48v DC (well more like 40v or something like that considering the voltage drop on 250 feet of ethernet cable).

Cheapest would be to buy a couple of ethernet switches to put at N1 and N2 and power those switches somehow. But, the problem is most cheap switches you'd buy come with an AC power adapter that converts mains voltage down to 5v or 7.5v at usually less than 1A, for a total of about 5w per switch.  

Those things will "inject" up to about 15w on the cable, but due to voltage drops on such long runs of ethernet cable you'd probably have only about 10-12 watts of power at N1 and N2, at some weird voltages (probably 40v or higher).

You'd either need to build custom power supplies for each switch at N1 and N2 to convert the 24-48v DC to 5v or 7.5v, or you'd need to buy an inverter to convert you dc voltage back to AC voltage just to plug the switch power adapter and convert it back to 5v or 7.5v dc required by the switches.

You'd also have to think about buying or making a custom cable that would convert the ethernet jack with up to 48v DC voltage to regular network jack you could plug in switches and separate dc jack from which you could power something.

Basically, overall it's a big pain in the ass. You're looking at close to 200$ just to bring power at N1 and N2 from both sides and you still

 

Here's an alternative.  So you have 750 feet or about 230 meters. Let's just go with 250 meters in total or about 800-820 feet, and let's arrange it like this:

 

BUILDING B1 :  ------ 80 meters (265 feet) ---------- node N1 -------------90 meters (295 ft) ---------- node N2 ------------80 meters (265 feet) ------- BUILDING B2

 

You can simply run AC cable in parallel with the cable from both B1 and B2, 2 conductor cable is about $100 for 1000 ft (305 meter) length.

Here's a good example, $117 for 300 meters of AWG 22 2-conductor cable: http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/general-cable-carol-brand/E1002S.30.10/E1002S-1000-ND/618468

Other cables here (ignore the speaker cables and just scroll down) : http://www.digikey.com/short/3hhzww

So you run 80-90 meters of AC cable from B1 and B2, and you buy a 5$ AC socket and just plug the AC adapter of some switch you buy and install in a box at each N1 and N2.

For the power consumption of those switches of less than 10 watts (about 0.1 A at 110v), AWG 22 .. AWG 24 is enough, basically at 100 meters at 0.2A power consumption, there's going to be a drop of about 3% on a AWG24 cable, so if you power with 110v AC from B1 you'd get about 105v AC at N1 which is well within a power adapter's input range (typically 80-90v AC to 240-260v AC)

So just buy a couple of small gigabit switches (try not to go for "green" switches, those tend to not run well with very long runs of cable. Here's for example a suggestion for what looks to be a good switch, 25$ :   http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833122668&ignorebbr=1

 

So $100-120 for power cable, about $10 for mains sockets, 50$ for two switches and probably a few dollars for a couple of metal cases.

 

One minor concern would be that the AC cable can influence the signal quality on the ethernet cable, but that can be easily fixed by going with FTP cable or a shielded UTP cable instead of plain UTP cable. Basically, some network cable with aluminum foil or mesh shielding the twisted pairs from outside interference, which can be also earthed on both ends of the cable for more safety.

Network cable like this is not much more expensive, probably about 10-30$ more for a 305 meter spool of network cable.

 

In the end, you still end cheaper than buying two of those power over ethernet things.

 

Another downside to this arrangement is that if sometimes one of those switches "freezes" you'd have to reset it by going to one of those buildings and unplug the mains cable for a few seconds.. if you're lucky you reset the right switch otherwise you have to go to the other building as well and repeat the process.

 

Well, you you can power both switches from just one building basically just continue the run of ac cable after the first ac socket, but the voltage drop at the second socket will be slightly higher in this case, you'll probably have only 95-100v AC at the second socket if you power it with 110v AC from one building.  Like I said, modern ac/dc adapters will work just fine with even lower AC voltages so you won't have problems.

[KRC1023]

1 minute ago, Donut417 said:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA29J1035274 

 

This is just the first one I found, you might be able to get a cheaper one. But converting the fiber at each end is possible and not insanely expensive as you might think. 

 

Id be concerned with the Ethernet repeater being outside. 

No, not that- how do I put a connector on the actual cable?

 

Also: the ethernet repeater will be in a sealed box, and I'm thinking of putting a heatsink on it, cutting a hole in the sealed box, and caulking it.

2 minutes ago, mariushm said:

-snip-

 

Those PoE extenders are advertised for doing exactly this- Why don't you think it will work?

Also, I see a few problems with your solution:

 

-Wire linked is inadequate (too small, not rated for burial. 24AWG may be plenty for the power requirement, but it's not within code for attaching to outlets)

-Switches are unreliable, as you stated, which I can't deal with- this network is also going to be the monitoring system for a solar array

-AC power wires must be buried at least 24 inches underground as per electrical code

-Outdoor outlets have to be GFCI (expensive), also as per electrical code

-Switch+proper outlet box+power adapter+switch is really big, causing me to have to set up a really large watertight box

 

I'm just not seeing how well this will work.

 

 

 

[mariushm]

I had a second look at those PoE extenders and I noticed something I missed before.

 

The PoE extenders can be powered from the input network cable OR from DC In.  So, the second PoE extender could get its power straight from the network cable which has power inserted by the previous PoE extender.

So what they're saying is that you can have something like this :

 

switch or device which injects power in the cable --> up to 100 m of cable -->  repeater 2 using power from cable --> up to 100 meters of cable --> repeater 2 using power from cable --> up to 100 m of cable --> final device.

 

You can't chain more than two because you may not have enough power at the end... Depending on standard, you have 15w or 30w at the beginning, let's go with 15w.  First repeater has a budget of about 13w due to losses in the cable, uses about 2w on itself so you're down to 11w and probably wastes another watt to boost the power for the next repeater. The next repeater probably has a budget of about 8 watts due to another round of losses in the cable between the two repeaters, uses 2 watts for itself so the remainder of about 5w is not enough power to reliably power a third extender.

 

Problem I see you still need to inject power in the cable at the source, in the first building but luckily there are cheap power injectors available.

Here's a list of such devices : http://www.digikey.com/short/3hh4ct

The Trendnet TE-100 datasheet says the repeater supports both 802.3af standard (PoE) and the newer 802.3at standard (PoE+) , so I'd go with something like this 802.3at compatible passive injector : http://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/phihong-usa/POE31W-240/993-1085-ND/2384569  (note power cable not included, buy one, standard IEC 320-C8 AC socket)

So you just get a patch cord and plug one end in the router or computer in the building, the other end in the injector and out comes the second cable with power in it which goes outside to your buried cable (and you put the two repeaters along the cable in sealed boxes.

Yeah, it should work.

 

ps. Going with repeaters instead of switches would probably be just slightly more reliable. Also keep in mind that even though these repeaters in theory only use up to 2w, that dissipated power could still warm up the repeater quite a bit in a sealed box under ground. You shouldn't use a tiny box for these repeaters, give the repeaters some air around them if you go this route.

 

ps2.  You may want to consider other solutions, like ethernet over copper wires (2base-tl, 10pass-sl, vdsl) (converts 10-100 mbps to as low as 2-5.5 mbps for 2pass-tl if using a pair or two pairs of copper cables, to up to 45mbps or something like that for the more complex and expensive ones)

 

There's s also ethernet over coax . For example, here's a pack of two ethernet to coax converters which advertise being capable of 100mbps up to 240 meters : https://www.amazon.com/Dualcomm-Ethernet-over-Adapters-DECA-100/dp/B009AGCLVG

They're even cheaper directly from the manufacturer's site, $70 for a pair : http://www.dual-comm.com/ethernet-over-coax-adapter.htm

They don't need any power, so I guess they're so low power they can draw a bit of energy from the ethernet signal itself .

It's less than 1gbps but if you say it's for monitoring, 100mbps should be enough and  it may be more reliable long term to use coaxial cable buried underground. Don't know about the quality of those converters though.

 

They also have a beefier model, which apparently can do up to 3km, they cost $110 each, so they would cost you $220 in total but the advantage would be you wouldn't need boxes for repeaters in the middle of the cable: http://www.dual-comm.com/deca511-ethernet-over-coax-adapter.htm

 

 

[KRC1023]

6 hours ago, mariushm said:

-snip-

 

Yeah, injecting power at the source really isn't a problem. I'd planned on that

 

Thanks for the coax one though, I'll look into that.

Also, It's not *just* for monitoring, but still the 100mbps is fine. I won't be transferring a lot of files over it... It'll work.

 

edit: Also, I can cut a hole in the box and caulk a heatsink in if I need to

[mariushm]

You're welcome, glad to know I could be of help.

 

If you end up considering the Ethernet to coax solution , please check the Amazon reviews (and if you find, other stores' reviews). The passive ones seem to be hit-and-miss and some report that the speed degrades with distance. Could be just dumb users trying to make those devices work with wrong impedance coaxial cables or damaged cables, but there could also be some truth behind those reviews.

I'd recommend going with the active (more expensive) converters which should have enough power to keep the signal strong for the whole length. The passive one look too much like toys to me.

 

It's kind of obvious, but if you're going to end up using some kind of PVC pipes to bury the cable, I'd also suggest using a slightly larger diameter tube and inserting a steel wire (or something equivalently strong, something that won't rot inside the pipes) along with the cable, so that if you decide at some point in the future to switch to fiber optic or some other solution, you could just tie/tape the new cable (along with a new wire) to the end of the steel wire and then pull out the wire, basically making it easy for you to insert your new cable along the old coaxial one.

 

[KRC1023]

 

10 minutes ago, mariushm said:

You're welcome, glad to know I could be of help.

 

If you end up considering the Ethernet to coax solution , please check the Amazon reviews (and if you find, other stores' reviews). The passive ones seem to be hit-and-miss and some report that the speed degrades with distance. Could be just dumb users trying to make those devices work with wrong impedance coaxial cables or damaged cables, but there could also be some truth behind those reviews.

I'd recommend going with the active (more expensive) converters which should have enough power to keep the signal strong for the whole length. The passive one look too much like toys to me.

 

It's kind of obvious, but if you're going to end up using some kind of PVC pipes to bury the cable, I'd also suggest using a slightly larger diameter tube and inserting a steel wire (or something equivalently strong, something that won't rot inside the pipes) along with the cable, so that if you decide at some point in the future to switch to fiber optic or some other solution, you could just tie/tape the new cable (along with a new wire) to the end of the steel wire and then pull out the wire, basically making it easy for you to insert your new cable along the old coaxial one.

 

 

I think I'll bury it directly. PVC adds a *lot* of cost, and it's rather annoying to do.

And yeah, I've come to the same conclusion about using the active converters- the distance is right on the edge of the limit for the passive ones. I'd rather not take the chance.

 

Now, if you could give me one more bit of advice- I can't work out what connector to use for those active converters.

 

 

Also: This? https://www.amazon.com/COMMSCOPE-Professional-Underground-COAXIAL-Coated/dp/B00TBWWCT0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1472992632&sr=8-1&keywords=1000ft+coaxial+cable+for+burial

 

edit: corrected typo

[Lurick]

You can order pre-terminated 50 micron fiber for about $300 or so for 250m worth which is plenty. You'll want to go with Single Mode fiber and have it terminated with LC on both ends. Then you can just get a couple 1000-Base SX SFPs and you're ready to go.

[mariushm]

The cable seems to be this one: http://www.commscope.com/catalog/broadband/product_details.aspx?id=46825

If it's really as described, then it seems like a good deal.

 

I tend to suggest Digikey.com or Mouser.com to US people, because these are authorized distributors of electronic components, so while they may be a bit expensive in low quantity, you have some kind of provenance guarantee, and kind of a minimum quality guarantee.

Here's links to coax cables on Digikey and Mouser.

Unfortunately, some cables like these "direct burial" types are of lower demand so not usually stocked and more expensive than sourcing them from other stores. Also, it's a bit to the side of the main focus of these stores (ICs and electronic parts used in electronics, coax cable is more telecommunication stuff). You could order them but it could take weeks for them to fulfill your order.

 

Connectors on the other hand are more readily available, here's some RG6 connectors on Digikey: http://www.digikey.com/short/3hhmtb

You'll need a crimping tool to mount the connectors. There are some connectors that are "twist-on", those are decent but I prefer crimped connectors.

 

[Quindor]

I would go the fiber route, it doesn't need to be so expensive as listed above!

 

Using a PAIR of media converters you should be able to easily reach your needed distance, and with gigabit too! These go up to 20KM using single mode fiber and are only about 30$ for a pair! Reviews look great too, and have personally used similar equipment in the past with great results. These boxes uses DWM to send and receive on two different light wavelengths thus only requiring a single optical cable.

 

Next you need some single mode fiber. I couldn't find of 700 feet (210 meters if I'm correct) but using a 200 meter and a 50 meter piece coupled using a couple block should work just as well for that distance (if you really want to up to 20KM couple blocks might cause too much signal loss). Alternatively you could just get a 400 meter cable which will always be long enough.  These fibers have one fiber core and a steel wire to go with it to prevent it from stretching. 

 

Adding all that up you should be set for less then 200$ including shipping and have a stable Gigabit connection! Only downside is that you can't terminate the cable yourself which might make getting it through a wall a bit harder then again, the single SC connector can fit in a PVC pipe unless there are very tight bends so shouldn't be too much a problem in my opinion.

 

 

 

 

[mariushm]

@Quindor I agree with you, fiber optics would be better.

 

But keep in mind poster wants to bury the cable for a distance of around 250 meters, and your cable is of the indoor type, thin and easy to cut/break by accident. You'd also have to spend money on pipe or you'd have to buy burial-grade fiber and that's typically not supplied with connectors already on the cable. There are companies that accept custom orders and would put the connectors for you but I suspect you'd end up with a quite high price for fiber.

 

 

[Quindor]

6 minutes ago, mariushm said:

@Quindor I agree with you, fiber optics would be better.

 

But keep in mind poster wants to bury the cable for a distance of around 250 meters, and your cable is of the indoor type, thin and easy to cut/break by accident. You'd also have to spend money on pipe or you'd have to buy burial-grade fiber and that's typically not supplied with connectors already on the cable. There are companies that accept custom orders and would put the connectors for you but I suspect you'd end up with a quite high price for fiber.

 

 

Sure, I agree there, burial fiber would be much better suited.

 

From what I'm able to tell from the listing, this fiber does seem to be more reinforced then standard (yellow) indoor fiber (guiding steel wire for tensile strength, etc.) but yeah, it's definitely on a budget. Still, when buried with a bit of care I think it's the best and more cost effective solution.

 

Putting the fiber inside of piping or maybe a cheap hose of some sort would definitely be preferred but I think it will work without issue for a home setup.

[Juan Visagie]

Are the buildings in sight of Each other?

If so than the easist way would be to use somting like this https://www.ubnt.com/airmax/nanostationm/.

These would connect the buildings to each other and you can lay your network from there

https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-NanoStation-locoM2-2-4GHz-Outdoor/dp/B004EGI3CI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473111792&sr=8-1&keywords=ubnt+locoM2

You will need 2 1 on eche side

Works out les than a 100 bucks. Best option If you have line of sight

Edited September 5, 2016 by Juan Visagie

[KRC1023]

On 9/5/2016 at 5:45 PM, Juan Visagie said:

Are the buildings in sight of Each other?

If so than the easist way would be to use somting like this https://www.ubnt.com/airmax/nanostationm/.

These would connect the buildings to each other and you can lay your network from there

https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-NanoStation-locoM2-2-4GHz-Outdoor/dp/B004EGI3CI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1473111792&sr=8-1&keywords=ubnt+locoM2

You will need 2 1 on eche side

Works out les than a 100 bucks. Best option If you have line of sight

I tried to figure that out, but there's too many trees. I said this in the post.

 

 

On 9/4/2016 at 9:31 AM, Quindor said:

-snip

Fiber would be the best, but I can't afford burial rated fiber (I found a seller who will terminate it, but it's $740), and I don't really want to deal with PVC. I'll do some thinking, though. Might go with the PVC..