Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: Dressing RG6
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 09:22:47 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 99
Message-ID: <v22ngs$vgif$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v204qu$99qs$1@dont-email.me> <v22iut$ucl3$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 18:22:53 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="78f075c53cdcb0cf9fbdb6abd4df5c62";
	logging-data="1032783"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19+JMcNFlLFNZu6LTuTiXlO"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:5Q1G9IgV2aOgvaEF9H3vLZrxJF4=
In-Reply-To: <v22iut$ucl3$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5544

On 5/15/2024 8:05 AM, Clive Arthur wrote:
> On 14/05/2024 17:51, Don Y wrote:
>> I've several short (a few feet) lengths of RG6 that I
>> would like to "strongly coerce" into assuming a particular
>> dressing.
>>
>> Securing the cables to a stationary surface isn't practical
>> without significantly lengthening them and distorting
>> their "natural" routing.

> How about semi-rigid adhesive lined heat shrink tubing?
> 
> https://www.farnell.com/datasheets/3758112.pdf

I'd have to look at it but can't imagine it would be any
stiffer than RG6 itself.

Part of the problem IS that stiffness; you can't impose a
particular shape on the cable that it will keep without
some other "enforcement".  E.g., if you were to directly mate
to a wall-mounted F-connector, you'd want to quickly bring
the cable back towards the wall (to keep it from interfering
with the other items using that "space").  You will, eventually,
get back to the wall about 6 inches from that connection
point (2" minimum bend radius; do the geometry).

Now, you can connect to a splitter -- which can be fastened
to that same wall (or, a coplanar surface).  A few inches later,
each output from the splitter will now have to find its way to
its respective destination, avoiding any other devices that
it encounters on that route and assuming an economical path
to that destination.

Then, the *second* wall-mounted F-connector can similarly
snake around the cabling and devices for the first to
find *its* devices.  Noting, of course, that each such
device somehow has to get its power and make its network
connection (i.e., more boxes and cables in the way).

Canvassing friends and neighbors, it seems that cable TV,
satellite TV and OTA broadcasts are delivered to the home
this way.  In various combinations depending on the occupant's
preferences and usage patterns.

E.g., one of my neighbors has "cable" for his internet connection,
OTA (roof-mounted antenna) for local TV (and radio!) and satellite
for his "foreign" TV.  Another neighbor has satellite and cable
for his "domestic" TV (sports junkies) and internet.

In a two-person household, it seems like 3 tuners are a minimum.
This assumes two people watching (different programs) and one
being recorded.

[Here, SWMBO often ties up two tuners recording concurrent
programs while I opt to watch a third "live"]

In a four-person household (i.e., kids), add another 2 or 3
tuners.  Recall that, even if the same program is being watched
by two occupants ON DIFFERENT TVs, each will want to be able
to channel-surf without interfering with the other's viewing.

Five (or more) tuners (cable or OTA) currently require at least
two physical devices.  And, don't forget the cable modem!  (I
assume satellite receivers can be similarly configured).

A TV tuner (cable or OTA) won't give you any "radio" capabilities
so add devices for that.

So, figure 7 (2+2 different types of TV, 2 radio, 1 modem) physical
devices have to be wired to some number of F-connectors protruding
from the wall.  (and powered and accessed electronically)

And, you want to put this pile of kit someplace out of the way,
yet accessible.  Professional in appearance.  And, maintainable
(not a hodge-podge of /ad hoc/ wiring).  Instead of having an STB
at *each* TV, a separate HiFi "somewhere", a modem sitting in your
living room BEHIND that TV, etc.

So, someplace like a closet, pantry, basement, attic, garage, etc.
None of which were likely intended to house those bits of kit.  Many
basements are "unfinished", have sparse power distribution, etc.
All (?) closets are devoid of power -- often true of pantries
and cupboards, as well.  Garages are often not "living spaces"
(so, are subject to temperature extremes).  I.e., houses aren't
designed with "equipment rooms" in mind (industrial and commercial
deployments are a piece of cake, by comparison!).  So, you are
intruding on OTHER uses for that space.

Empirically, it seems like you need a bit less than a square foot
of "surface" for each device and it's cabling -- IF you can dress
all of the cabling nice and tight.  (and, assuming you are a
conscientious "installer"!)

[Remember, YOU don't manufacture any of these devices so have
to adapt to the mechanical configurations of THEIR manufacturers!]

And, this is just the run-of-the-mill devices that you're already
using...