Complicated Telephone problem

A mate of mine had been having problems ever since he got his
broadband. The ISP send out a new router and his sync was 1700kbps
before hand and when he tried with the new router it increase t 3mbps.
So slight issue with the router but based upon his 500m distance from
exchange and the fact the the line is actaully 900m long his isp (sky)
say the line should hand 17mbps. Its not even reaching 8mbps. Anyway,
so i tired it at the test socket, as the router had been restarted
many times at an extension socket, and got 4.6- 4.9mbps sync. My first
instinct was the internal wiring is faulty and rip out the lot and
replace it with cat5. But when i put the faceplate back on and tested
it at the same extension it was at the same speed as the test socket.
Plugging it in the master socket, so on the faceplate however gives a
rate of 1.6mbps.
I thought they may have used alarm cable and a Capacitance issue might
be the problem, it may well cause this sort of problem.However he
cable looks like twisted pair telephone cable. Only difference that I
know is that alarm cable normally has 3 pairs and the insulators of
the pairs are solid.
Can see any obvious sources of EMI, no CFL lighting. The house is
plagued with spot lights though , i am not sure if the give of
interference, otherwise the transformers I don't believe are close by
to the telephone cable.
Any Ideas on what could be the problem. I have ordered a filtered
faceplate anyway(XTE-2005) so that I can run a cat5 length to the
dedicated extension for ADSL but any other ideas.

"naza" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:c8e3c092-2de9-4601-81c2-(E-Mail Removed)...
>A mate of mine had been having problems ever since he got his
> broadband. The ISP send out a new router and his sync was 1700kbps
> before hand and when he tried with the new router it increase t 3mbps.
> So slight issue with the router but based upon his 500m distance from
> exchange and the fact the the line is actaully 900m long his isp (sky)
> say the line should hand 17mbps. Its not even reaching 8mbps. Anyway,
> so i tired it at the test socket, as the router had been restarted
> many times at an extension socket, and got 4.6- 4.9mbps sync. My first
> instinct was the internal wiring is faulty and rip out the lot and
> replace it with cat5. But when i put the faceplate back on and tested
> it at the same extension it was at the same speed as the test socket.
> Plugging it in the master socket, so on the faceplate however gives a
> rate of 1.6mbps.
> I thought they may have used alarm cable and a Capacitance issue might
> be the problem, it may well cause this sort of problem.However he
> cable looks like twisted pair telephone cable. Only difference that I
> know is that alarm cable normally has 3 pairs and the insulators of
> the pairs are solid.
> Can see any obvious sources of EMI, no CFL lighting. The house is
> plagued with spot lights though , i am not sure if the give of
> interference, otherwise the transformers I don't believe are close by
> to the telephone cable.
> Any Ideas on what could be the problem. I have ordered a filtered
> faceplate anyway(XTE-2005) so that I can run a cat5 length to the
> dedicated extension for ADSL but any other ideas.

Nothing unduly complicated about this IMHO, and you have the
ideal solution in the final paragraph.
While you are waiting for the filtered faceplate, why not plug
an ordinary filter dongle into the test socket and plug the existing
faceplate into its PSTN port, messy, but it works just as well.
As you are running a CAT5 why not consider putting the router next to
the NTE5 and connect via Ethernet, or just use wi-fi.
--
Graham

%Profound_observation%

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 21:09:43 +0100, "Graham." <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
>
>"naza" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:c8e3c092-2de9-4601-81c2-(E-Mail Removed)...
>>A mate of mine had been having problems ever since he got his
>> broadband. The ISP send out a new router and his sync was 1700kbps
>> before hand and when he tried with the new router it increase t 3mbps.
>> So slight issue with the router but based upon his 500m distance from
>> exchange and the fact the the line is actaully 900m long his isp (sky)
>> say the line should hand 17mbps. Its not even reaching 8mbps. Anyway,
>> so i tired it at the test socket, as the router had been restarted
>> many times at an extension socket, and got 4.6- 4.9mbps sync. My first
>> instinct was the internal wiring is faulty and rip out the lot and
>> replace it with cat5. But when i put the faceplate back on and tested
>> it at the same extension it was at the same speed as the test socket.
>> Plugging it in the master socket, so on the faceplate however gives a
>> rate of 1.6mbps.
>> I thought they may have used alarm cable and a Capacitance issue might
>> be the problem, it may well cause this sort of problem.However he
>> cable looks like twisted pair telephone cable. Only difference that I
>> know is that alarm cable normally has 3 pairs and the insulators of
>> the pairs are solid.
>> Can see any obvious sources of EMI, no CFL lighting. The house is
>> plagued with spot lights though , i am not sure if the give of
>> interference, otherwise the transformers I don't believe are close by
>> to the telephone cable.
>> Any Ideas on what could be the problem. I have ordered a filtered
>> faceplate anyway(XTE-2005) so that I can run a cat5 length to the
>> dedicated extension for ADSL but any other ideas.
>
>Nothing unduly complicated about this IMHO, and you have the
>ideal solution in the final paragraph.
>While you are waiting for the filtered faceplate, why not plug
>an ordinary filter dongle into the test socket and plug the existing
>faceplate into its PSTN port, messy, but it works just as well.
>As you are running a CAT5 why not consider putting the router next to
>the NTE5 and connect via Ethernet, or just use wi-fi.

Or use Homeplugs ..

> Anyway,
> so i tired it at the test socket, as the router had been restarted
> many times at an extension socket, and got 4.6- 4.9mbps sync.

I take it that the 4.6 - 4.9 sync at the test socket is the best you
can get, and as soon as you connect to the extension socket
the speed drops??????
How many devices, extension phones, caller ID boxes, fax
machines, extra ringers, alarm system, etc are on the phone
side.
I have found that the lower the impedance on the phone
side the slower the ADSL connection.
Once you get down to a few hundred ohms it's down
to a crawl.
So unhook the phones leg stuff, and add it back item
by item, while monitoring the ADSL sync speed, bearing
in mind it is slow to repond.
Sure your distances are correct?
Lines don't always go by the obvious and shortest route.
Not common but some cowboy installers can wire
twisted pair with split pairs, one wire from one pair,
second wire from another pair.
If the floodlights are sodium or mercury discharge,
potential problems, but it should be obvious,
you just switch them on and off, should show
up if they are affecting the situation.

>I take it that the 4.6 - 4.9 sync at the test socket is the best you
>can get, and as soon as you connect to the extension socket
>the speed drops??????

Not Quite. That's what I thought at first but after unplugging the
faceplate and along with it the extensions while I tested at the test
socket, when I plugged it back in the extensions it connected at full
speed, but yet again the speed is decreasing slowly again. From 4.6 to
4.3.
There are only two phones on the line.
Distances as the crow flies is 500M and Sky confirmed that also
mentioning that the cable length is 900m. Could not make any comment
on the validity.
Tested it in the day and so lighting was not really a problem

naza, in article <12ad86bb-16df-431a-88a7-
(E-Mail Removed)>, says...

>There are only two phones on the line.
>Distances as the crow flies is 500M and Sky confirmed that also
>mentioning that the cable length is 900m. Could not make any comment
>on the validity.
>Tested it in the day and so lighting was not really a problem

Look in the back of the master socket. There should only be
the incoming wires connected to the screw terminals. If there
had been an old alarm installation, the wire could have been
connected directly to the drop-wire terminals so the circuit
wasn't broken if the front panel was removed. Alternatively,
someone may have had a short extension wire and so connected
this to the screw terminals. Do you have Sky and did they
install a phone socket for the box?

If this is OK, check the drop wire route. There may be
another junction box into which someone has incorrectly wired
an extension cable. Check the route is well away from things
like fluorescents and other sources of interference. Check
there are no joints in this wire, other than in junction
boxes, and that the wire isn't physically damaged - a ladder
could have removed some insulation allowing the ingress of
water. If there is a problem with the drop wire it is an
Openreach job to fix.

Remove all the extension wiring to "pin3" - the ring wire. If
any phone needs it, use a cheap plug-in filter or adapter to
provide the ring capacitor at the slave socket.

Listen for interference in the MW band of an AM radio, tuned
off-station.

Is there any nose audible on the phone line, using the quiet
line test?
--
JohnW.
Replace the obvious with co.uk in 2 places to mail me.

On 4 Apr, 00:15, JohnW <inva...@earlsway.invalid> wrote:
> naza, in article <12ad86bb-16df-431a-88a7-
> efe34a733...@b5g2000pri.googlegroups.com>, says...
>
> >There are only two phones on the line.
> >Distances as the crow flies is 500M and Sky confirmed that also
> >mentioning that the cable length is 900m. Could not make any comment
> >on the validity.
> >Tested it in the day and so lighting was not really a problem
>
> Look in the back of the master socket. There should only be
> the incoming wires connected to the screw terminals. If there
> had been an old alarm installation, the wire could have been
> connected directly to the drop-wire terminals so the circuit
> wasn't broken if the front panel was removed. Alternatively,
> someone may have had a short extension wire and so connected
> this to the screw terminals. Do you have Sky and did they
> install a phone socket for the box?

There was never an alarm system in the house and the back of the
master socket looked fine. Did not poke around in there too much. The
house was done up recently, which including a whole electrical re-
writing and new telephone cabling, which was not done by the
electrician. There was already a socket for the Sky box, so Sky did
not do anything.

> If this is OK, check the drop wire route. There may be
> another junction box into which someone has incorrectly wired
> an extension cable. Check the route is well away from things
> like fluorescents and other sources of interference. Check
> there are no joints in this wire, other than in junction
> boxes, and that the wire isn't physically damaged - a ladder
> could have removed some insulation allowing the ingress of
> water. If there is a problem with the drop wire it is an
> Openreach job to fix.

I have checked interference for the obvious sources of interference
but not walked round with a radio. As for the route of the drop wire
there is a problem. The cable runs from the pole to the fascia of the
house, then runs down into the porch on the outside wall. Into the
Porch and into a little Cupboard where the NTE is. Inside the cupboard
I can see the route of the cable. But I am certain there is a junction
box as the cable running to the NTE is not the drop wire but there is
cladding on the porch, so I cant find the junction box or the drop
wire at that point. The cladding looks like its glued on but it was
done by the previous owner, so don't know the specifics.

> Remove all the extension wiring to "pin3" - the ring wire. If
> any phone needs it, use a cheap plug-in filter or adapter to
> provide the ring capacitor at the slave socket.

Its already running off just the AB cables

> Listen for interference in the MW band of an AM radio, tuned
> off-station.
>
> Is there any nose audible on the phone line, using the quiet
> line test?
Phone line is totally silent.

> JohnW.
> Replace the obvious with co.uk in 2 places to mail me.

naza, in article <44a1d959-604a-4ce1-8907-a9bfb696efb3
@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, says...

<cut>

>Phone line is totally silent.

Having eliminated the obvious...

You appear to have eliminated all the private home telephone
wiring by connecting your modem/router directly into the
master's test socket (what BT to RJ11 converter did you use?)
It this true? Was the modem/router then located next to the
master socket and was the cable between the two short?

What modem/router are you using (or is it a USB one?) and does
its connection wire, (the RJ11 one) appear to be a flat cable,
like most? If so, have you coiled up any surplus neatly, away
from all other wires?

I've improved several installations that had this wire simply
pushed down the back of the computer or laying across other
cables. Remember this is carrying the low-level ADSL signal
and, being typically untwisted, is prone to pick up any noise
that is going around as normal mode noise (I.e. unbalanced).
You can get versions of this cable that is twisted, e.g.
http://tinyurl.com/2dchpq (but do you need 20m...) I've not
used this particular one but was thinking of getting some of
this cable to make shorter versions to replace the cheap, flat
types that are typically shipped with ADSL modems.

--
JohnW.
Replace the obvious with co.uk in 2 places to mail me.

On 4 Apr, 12:07, JohnW <inva...@earlsway.invalid> wrote:
> naza, in article <44a1d959-604a-4ce1-8907-a9bfb696efb3
> @p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, says...
>
> <cut>
>
> >Phone line is totally silent.
>
> Having eliminated the obvious...
>
> You appear to have eliminated all the private home telephone
> wiring by connecting your modem/router directly into the
> master's test socket (what BT to RJ11 converter did you use?)
I plugged it in with one of his filters first then I did a direct
connection from the modem to test socket.

> It this true? Was the modem/router then located next to the
> master socket and was the cable between the two short?
Cable length is about 1M directly to the test socket.


> What modem/router are you using (or is it a USB one?) and does
> its connection wire, (the RJ11 one) appear to be a flat cable,
> like most? If so, have you coiled up any surplus neatly, away
> from all other wires?

It a router, which was connected to PC at the time of testing via
ethernet. Its an Wireless router, Netgear DG834GT, known to be fully
working, it was my own one. The cable was a flat and was running
fairly straight.

> I've improved several installations that had this wire simply
> pushed down the back of the computer or laying across other
> cables. Remember this is carrying the low-level ADSL signal
> and, being typically untwisted, is prone to pick up any noise
> that is going around as normal mode noise (I.e. unbalanced).
> You can get versions of this cable that is twisted, e.g.http://tinyurl.com/2dchpq(but do you need 20m...) I've not
> used this particular one but was thinking of getting some of
> this cable to make shorter versions to replace the cheap, flat
> types that are typically shipped with ADSL modems.

I may well looking into that as well.