james.wilson Posted September 28, 2008 Share Posted September 28, 2008 but why use fibre? its very specialised and a nightmare to faultfind? Using cat5 is simple and easy to setup / trace a fault. Active transmittets aint that much, and setting up media converters over this fibre link wont be as simple. While maybe fibre maybe the right pro way, is it the right way for this? securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilkie Posted September 28, 2008 Share Posted September 28, 2008 much cheaper option - use a pressure pad towed behind the cow, if a calf pops out 'hey presto' regs alan hi Ilkie, i'm not challenging you in any way, just bowing to your supireior expertise in this, imo surely if the estimated distance of 600mteres (if correct), prevents a passive cat5e solution, so he will have to fit launch amps to each camera? i concider to get what he needs, even if the cat5e did work he would be limited in his options to either 4 cams, (or 3 cams + ptz control) per cable, so now needing 2 cables (for 6+ cameras) to be run with 6+ launch amps. given this could be done on a single multimode fibre optic cable without the launch amps, would this not balance the cost of the transponders and give greater scope for expansion later? i don't get much oportunity to go long cable distance's with cctv, but did do a quote last year for a stables using radio, so very interested (and very respectful) of what you think of my 'pained' deliberations. regs alan There is a number of old fashioned ways of doing this. Analogue video over coax. If you work on the basis of a maximum of 6 db loss over the cable length implies using a coax with a loss of less tha 1db per 100m at 5Mhz. So using a cable such as CT167 (0.9dB), CT223 (0.7db), URM77 (0.6dB0 or even CT490 (0.3dB) distances over 600m are easily acheived without equalisation. Note these cables are more like hosepipes compared with standard RG59! RF video over coax. Using modulators you could multiplex real time video over one coax cable as above. This is the basis of old style cable TV distribution. Traditional twisted pair - forget CAT5 , old stye twisted pair This requires equipment which falls under two headings 1) Launch Equipment Launch equipment is designed to precondition the video signal for transmission over the cables 2) Cable Equalising Equipment Cable equalising amplifiers are designed to provide variable compensation to make up for the losses after the video signal has been transmitted over the cables. Not many engineers are equiped to set these circuits up as you need a sync/pulse generation with a scope. With it you can easily get unsheilded telephone cable running analogue video over 1km, more with repeaters. This type of kit is still available (just). (just thinking if you want an IP option you can consider telephone cables with DSL modems). Multimode fibre will of course give runs up to 3km but a bitch to maintain in a farmyard senario if the cable is cut. (I can also help you out with wireless using advanced radio kit) If you would like some contacts PM me or pop over for a cuppa, I'm down by Fords (A13) Ilkie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Jon Posted September 28, 2008 Share Posted September 28, 2008 Given that this is not a security application, but rather a 'process monitoring' job, the object of the exercise is to be able to keep an eye on some fairly large beasties, that don't tend to move around that much when they're actually doing their stuff. How about .... one signal cable, alarm input switcher (or Quad with alarm inputs) at the camera end, and another cable to provide the alarm input switching control from the farmhouse. There's a little bit more to it than that, but I'll leave you to fill in the blanks As I've said before, IMHO fibre in this environment would easily be my last option, not because it won't work, but simply because cables on farms do get damaged and repairing broken fibre cables in less than ideal conditions, is not something I personally would want to do on most days of the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfur mo Posted September 29, 2008 Share Posted September 29, 2008 interesting debate imo, i think we will all differ on our thoughts, any site needs a visit to asses all the options properly. might be theres a nice stut fence to attach the cables to, and fiber is pretty good imo mechanically but no good swinging it in the wind between telegraph poles i have the kit for terminating f/optics, but getting cable in pre-cut and ended legnths makes life a hell of a lot easier, just be a little over than under legnth wise, you can always loose a few meters but a bit of a begger to stretch it a few . as Ilkie said using bigger coax would be like running hose pipes, an option that was used way back with multiplexers was to use 2 mpx's in tandm, output from MPX 1 which would normally go to the VCR sent to the 2nd MPX, which was then used in playback mode to view cameras live. with the o/p going for about 1k cost, i think he will be very disappointed so either forget it or increase the spend for a proper system. regs alan If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
micro Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Hi, can anyone help me by suggesting a cheap system for our farm. We live about 600 metres from the farm buildings and would like to be able to check our cows when they are calving during the night etc.. We currently have a basic wireless camera with panel antennas but I would like to progress to one or two ptz cameras with sound. Mostly they would be used in sheds about 50 metres by 30 with adequate light. It is a long distance to run cable to the buildings so I was wondering about IPcameras as there is a rented farmhouse near the buildings with a broadband connection. We dont really need recording ability, just real time viewing. If anyone has any thoughts it would be appreciated, thanks :!: standard wireless transmission eqpt would be a lower cost option than the IP route, if you have line of site between the two points, 600 metres is no problem for baluns, can you run cat5e along the fence/ground/posts etc, this is the lowest cost option Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
micro Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 :!: standard wireless transmission eqpt would be a lower cost option than the IP route, if you have line of site between the two points, 600 metres is no problem for baluns, can you run cat5e along the fence/ground/posts etc, this is the lowest cost option Roll of cat5e Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpat Systems Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 :!: standard wireless transmission eqpt would be a lower cost option than the IP route, if you have line of site between the two points, 600 metres is no problem for baluns, can you run cat5e along the fence/ground/posts etc, this is the lowest cost option What wireless PTZ control are you suggesting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 and how would they control it with the pc? securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arfur mo Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Roll of cat5e If you think education is difficult, try being stupid!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.wilson Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 500m you would have to go active arf. securitywarehouse Security Supplies from Security Warehouse Trade Members please contact us for your TSI vetted trade discount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.