Don't run fiber without some type of covering - whether conduit, sprinkler pipe, etc., you want it to be protected.

Run extra fishing strings (or additional fiber). Buy what is available today. When (or if) you get to data capacity, newer units will have come down in price.

I have some friends who are extending a shop on their property. The cable access to the house will enter the shop (the company says the house is too far). They are putting conduit between the house and shop as there will be power running between. I've mentioned to them to have an additional conduit run for fiber.

Ouch!

The 4 strand direct bury with ends, pull eye, at 130 feet comes to $654.40 when I key it up. Didn't look at shipping cost. The two strand from them looks about only $100 cheaper.

The two strand at amazon in one inch PVC conduit would be about $230 or about $150 in PVC 200 PSI water pipe.

I understand the point to point fiber run with ethernet on into the equipment. I had wondered about that.

So IF the cheaper fiber will survive for a few years in conduit It looks like that may be my choice...

^^^ TV Coax, my friend. That is, if cost for the fiber is a factor. There's a reason it's been buried directly for about a half century now in millions of suburban front yards. Reliable and damn cheap. No need for conduit, just get the direct bury rated and bury the damn stuff.

Best Buy has Motorola's MM2025 MoCA to Ethernet adapters on clearance for $158. That's for a pair of them. They are 2.5gbps. If coax doesn't have the drawbacks of Ethernet wire, it maybe a good option over fiber optic for the price. The max coax length is 300 feet.

These are plug and play. Run the coax between the house and barn, connect each end to the coax terminal on each adapter, plug a Ethernet patch cable from each adapter to the switch in each building, and plug the adapters' power supplies in.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
^^^ TV Coax, my friend. That is, if cost for the fiber is a factor. There's a reason it's been buried directly for about a half century now in millions of suburban front yards.

That isn't plain old coax. That stuff is gel-filled direct-bury. From all I've read: An even bigger PITA to work with than direct-bury UTP.

Since this project is price-sensitive, I'll again recommend point-to-point wireless bridges. the pair I mentioned, above, are less than $200 at Amazon.

Add simple wall mounts and a couple short pieces of Sched 40 PVC, and done.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
^^^ TV Coax, my friend. That is, if cost for the fiber is a factor. There's a reason it's been buried directly for about a half century now in millions of suburban front yards.

That isn't plain old coax. That stuff is gel-filled direct-bury. From all I've read: An even bigger PITA to work with than direct-bury UTP.

Strange, I didn't find putting the F connectors on the RG6 direct bury stuff to be a big deal. Honest. And I've done it a bunch, right out of the ground. I'm referring to RG6 direct bury, not the heavier backbone stuff.

But a length can be purchased with the F conns already installed, which is what I suggested. Then it should really be no big deal, just bury it in the trench, no conduit needed, and done.

ensigmatic: May I ask where someone said RG6 direct burial is difficult to work with? I'm just surprised and I don't really know what is difficult about it, or what this means. Especially if you buy a length with the connectors already installed. Just stick it in the trench and done. Honestly I feel the OP should spend the $40 to $60 and do this regardless of whatever other solution is chosen. just as a cheap backup. Even if he goes wireless, I feel he should still bury some RG6, with F's pre-installed.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: radioman,

The reason for fiber over ethernet cable was for avoiding potential lightning damage.

Would RG6 not be susceptible to lightning as ethernet is?

Coax and shielded ethernet (twisted pairs) can be grounded at both ends, but there is always potential for surge/spike/shock with anything conductive. Fiber and Wifi completely eliminate that.

Not sure I know enough to even ask a proper question but... how do I get seamless auto switching from my in house wifi to the one based in the barn when moving between the two if their signals overlap in places. Would a mesh setup do that or...

Checkyeremail.com

quote:

Originally posted by cparktd:
The reason for fiber over ethernet cable was for avoiding potential lightning damage.

Would RG6 not be susceptible to lightning as ethernet is?

People are overthinking this. It's just a 110' buried cable between a house and a barn. No big deal, and if there was that much of a risk then the power lines in the trench would face the same fate.

honestly you are likely to run into more lightning issues from the wifi endpoints which are up in the air.

Regarding noise to the signal inside the coax, please remember that it's coax with multiple shields.

That said, I know what I would do. YMMV.

Something to consider:
Option A:
Trim you vegetation (if possible) for a line of sight and install wireless bridge.

Option B:
Trench far enough away to bury Ethernet cable.



Think it through even if you have to sell or not use your existing equipment.
Ya know the measure twice - cut once philosophy.
Long term planning of infrastructure is what the Pros do, finding the cheapest route is what the average consumer does and thinks.

.02

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
People are overthinking this. It's just a 110' buried cable between a house and a barn. No big deal, and if there was that much of a risk then the power lines in the trench would face the same fate.

For somebody with the handle "radioman," you often say some of the most astonishing things.

What's at the ends of power lines is significantly different from what's at the ends of a low-voltage data cables.

That being said: Lightning really wouldn't be a major consideration, for me, unless I lived in an exceptionally lightning-prone area.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
honestly you are likely to run into more lightning issues from the wifi endpoints which are up in the air.

Hardly. There's very little antenna, relatively speaking, compared to a hundred feet or more of cable.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
Regarding noise to the signal inside the coax, please remember that it's coax with multiple shields.

It's still not impervious to nearby emitted noise.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Something to consider:
Option A:
Trim you vegetation (if possible) for a line of sight and install wireless bridge.

Personally, I wouldn't even worry about that amount of vegetation. It's not all that dense and it's only a hundred feet.

Alternatively: Go with a pair of Ubiquiti 900Mhz wireless back-haul bridges. Less bandwidth, but better penetration.

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:
Think it through even if you have to sell or not use your existing equipment.
Ya know the measure twice - cut once philosophy.
Long term planning of infrastructure is what the Pros do, finding the cheapest route is what the average consumer does and thinks.

Yup. Which is why the stuff the Pros do tends to work, and work reliably for years, whereas what the average consumer does, often not so much

Just to keep things clear, is coax burial a no go for the same reasons STP burial is a no go: ground loops, need to run in a separate trench from the power lines?

COAX is typically grounded at both ends at the service demarc, like phones, CATV and electrical service drops. (Bus bar wire to ground rod(s) driven to the appropriate depth for the soil type.

But, it still presents a possible ground loop/shock/surge if the ground is compromised, and even with ground(s), lightning can be sufficient to path through the cable.

Even though COAX is shielded, it can also suffer signal degradation from electrical parallels, and requires 6 or more inches separation.

There are reasons transmission is going fiber and away from coax. But I am not looking to argue the points.

My perspective is a viable, reliable, long term solution that is affordable and can be accomplished by the OP.

Yes, Wifi backhaul will work, but there are some things that can interfere or make it slightly more likely to be damaged or fail and require ladder and some effort anytime it needs to be looked at for a problem.

The fiber solution I recommend, is pretty simple. The media converters are basically a switch with two (or more) interfaces, in this case, fiber send and receive ports and an ethernet port. It is either working or it is not.

The pair are about $60, so low cost to replace, if needed. The fiber, if properly enclosed, should never be a problem.

To be clear: If I were going to do this my first impulse would be two runs of direct-bury fiber, purchased in bulk and terminated myself.

That being said: I've never even researched, much less done this

For neatness I would go with switches with SFP ports and fiber transceivers, as smschulz suggested, and damn the expense.

quote:

Originally posted by cparktd:
The two strand at amazon in one inch PVC conduit would be about $230 or about $150 in PVC 200 PSI water pipe.

Don't put fiber in PVC. Again: There will be water in there eventually.

There's some disagreement over how much that may degrade the fibers performance, but, one point upon which there's no disagreement is what'll happen to the integrity of the fiber if that water freezes.

quote:

Originally posted by radioman:
ensigmatic: May I ask where someone said RG6 direct burial is difficult to work with?

Sorry, I missed this earlier.

Over on Broadband Reports/DSL Reports. It's discussed often. In discussions with a Belden engineer, relating to direct-bury Cat 6, he agreed gel-filled cable is a PITA to work with.

Thank you, sigmonkey for your insights.

100 meters of single-mode LC-LC fiber is about $40. 30 meters is less than $20.

The adapters described earlier are pretty easy to use. Pretty much plug and play.

https://www.amazon.com/TRENDne...a-548123193274&psc=1

The GBIC used to plug into the slot is reasonable as well.

https://www.amazon.com/TRENDne...tronics%2C124&sr=1-5

Fiber transmits on one fiber and receives on the other - 1Gbps each direction. If you're worried about throughput, you can get two sets, then use switches that can aggregate two ports on each end to double that to 2Gbps each way. Unless you're running a full server farm out there, you should be well within limits.

One other advantage of using fiber - no magnetic fields for someone to detect if they run a sweep along the path.

quote:

Originally posted by SigSAC:
100 meters of single-mode LC-LC fiber is about $40. 30 meters is less than $20.

Is that direct-bury fiber?

quote:

Originally posted by SigSAC:
One other advantage of using fiber - no magnetic fields for someone to detect if they run a sweep along the path.

That also means you can't tell it's there with a Miss Dig type of check. He's laying it near power line, but, failing that I'd consider burying a detectable conductor along with the fiber, as our natural gas company did with the plastic pipe with which they replaced our failing copper line.

Sorry guys, I'm still listening, thanks for still voicing opinions. Its just I am overwhelmed with projects right now...

Cable in conduit... if sealed at both ends should stop water or moist air intrusion will likely stop water collection in the conduit. Similar perhaps to the way we had to seal both ends of the conduits running to gas pump islands that we wired back in the day to prevent gas fumes in the building.

I am leaning to Monkey's original fiber suggestion... in conduit and attempt to seal the ends.