Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable is 
per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect it's 
per conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.
-- 
Clint Sharp

In article <iI+nPYBAULYJFwrh@clintsmc.demon.co.uk>, Clint Sharp says...
> Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable is 
> per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect it's 
> per conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.
> 
The only figure that matters is the per conductor figure.

-- 
Conor

I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't 
looking good either. - Scott Adams

"Conor"  wrote in message 
news:6sbs7mF546o0U12@mid.individual.net...
> In article <iI+nPYBAULYJFwrh@clintsmc.demon.co.uk>, Clint Sharp says...
>> Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable is
>> per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect it's
>> per conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.
>>
> The only figure that matters is the per conductor figure.
>
> -- 
> Conor
>

It is a shame you didn't answer the question that was asked!
Read it again.

"Clint Sharp"  wrote in message 
news:iI+nPYBAULYJFwrh@clintsmc.demon.co.uk...
> Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable is 
> per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect it's per 
> conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.
> -- 
> Clint Sharp

? 0.188 Ohm per Metre...

On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:09:20 +0000
Clint Sharp  wrote:

> Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable
> is per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect
> it's per conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.

It doesn't make sense to be anything other than per conductor - why
try to complicate it?
:-)

In message <oxc8l.2$4M6.0@newsfe18.ams2>, Quagmire  
writes
>
>"Clint Sharp"  wrote in message
>news:iI+nPYBAULYJFwrh@clintsmc.demon.co.uk...
>> Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable is
>> per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect it's per
>> conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.
>> --
>> Clint Sharp
>
>? 0.188 Ohm per Metre...
>
>
Yeah, per conductor, depending on who makes it, it goes as low as 0.09 
ohm per meter but per pair or for all four pairs? I assume per conductor 
but...
-- 
Clint Sharp

"Rob Morley"  wrote in message
news:20090105055449.66f0def3@bluemoon...
> On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:09:20 +0000
> Clint Sharp  wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable
>> is per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect
>> it's per conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.
>
> It doesn't make sense to be anything other than per conductor - why
> try to complicate it?
> :-)


PER CONDUCTOR.... each wire, however you like to phrase it !  lol

And it should read as EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN - for some reason my mailer 
cocked up that symbol, sorry.

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:43:17 -0000
"Quagmire"  wrote:

> And it should read as EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN - for some reason my
> mailer cocked up that symbol, sorry.
> 
I guess OE tries to be clever and produce a "less than or equal to"
symbol that only Windows understands, rather than just leaving it as
<=

In message <20090105055449.66f0def3@bluemoon>, Rob Morley 
 writes
>On Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:09:20 +0000
>Clint Sharp  wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know if the resistance/100M quoted for CAT5e solid cable
>> is per conductor or per pair or for the cable as a whole? I suspect
>> it's per conductor but can't find a definite statement on the web.
>
>It doesn't make sense to be anything other than per conductor - why
>try to complicate it?
>:-)
>
No, you're almost definitely right and it does make sense, it's just the 
little voice nagging me that it might not be quite right.

  It's probably not too important for the application either as there 
will be 3 pairs that I can use but calculating the worst case gives me 
unacceptable losses that may mean having to pull additional cables via a 
very difficult route. Note, it's not going to be used for Ethernet.
-- 
Clint Sharp

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:12:18 +0000
Clint Sharp  wrote:

>   It's probably not too important for the application either as there 
> will be 3 pairs that I can use but calculating the worst case gives
> me unacceptable losses that may mean having to pull additional cables
> via a very difficult route. Note, it's not going to be used for
> Ethernet.

If the cable's already in place would it not be easier just to stick a
meter on it?

In message <20090106110656.2e78b3d7@bluemoon>, Rob Morley 
 writes
>On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:12:18 +0000
>Clint Sharp  wrote:
>
>>   It's probably not too important for the application either as there
>> will be 3 pairs that I can use but calculating the worst case gives
>> me unacceptable losses that may mean having to pull additional cables
>> via a very difficult route. Note, it's not going to be used for
>> Ethernet.
>
>If the cable's already in place would it not be easier just to stick a
>meter on it?
>
Test leads not long enough lol, I'll short a pair out later tomorrow and 
measure it. Won't have access to it until tomorrow hence asking.
-- 
Clint Sharp