household outdoor/wet location connections

Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:31 am   

Hi,

I have CATV/phone/network connections in several places
on the outside of the house. Of course, these have to
be "weatherproof" (just for the sake of the connectors
themselves).

I initially had the connectors "exposed" under a hinged
cover (that was not intended to seal watertight. This
was kind to the cabling mated to the connectors. But,
left the connectors more vulnerable.

I replaced these (covers) with spring-loaded, "water
tight" covers which protect the connectors better
(when NOT in use). But, the spring-loaded doors put
lots of stress on the cables *mated* to the connectors.

So, I'm looking for yet another option. Perhaps something
*designed* for outdoor use (so far, the connectors I have
used have NOT been "special" in any way).

Ideally, connectors/covers that treat each connection
individually -- so exposing one connection doesn't
require exposing another UNUSED connection (e.g., think
in terms of duplex receptacles). Maybe even the REALLY
old fashioned "screw cover" plates?

Thx,
--don

Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:29 pm   

On 1/27/2012 12:31 AM, Don Y wrote:

We always used a rubber compound to seal those connectors. Lot's of
sources, used on both communications and in automotive work (to seal
holes, and such, in vehicles. Never hardens, very sticky, usually black
(but you can get gray). You kneed it for a while to warm it up and
soften it, then work it around the connectors. Very water tight. Very
hard to get off the hands when done, but hey, that's life.



--
I'm never going to grow up.

Fri Jan 27, 2012 2:40 pm   

On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 22:31:57 -0700, Don Y <this_at_isnotme.com> wrote:


Look at Amphenol's RJF families. The RJF 544 types aren't *terribly*
pricey and they are rated IP67. They use standard "RJ-45" connectors
internally, so there are no special issues regarding maintaining the
twist or pair matching, etc.

--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA

Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:46 pm   

Hi Peter,

On 1/27/2012 6:29 AM, PeterD wrote:

That would be fine for sealing *inside* the connectors (wire-side).
But, using it on the mating face would imply you aren't going
to ever *separate* the connectors, right?

(Silicone caulk also works well. For buried connections -- like
landscape lighting -- I run the wires into an old "pill bottle"
and then pump it full of silicone caulk, wait for it to "cure",
then bury in soil.)

I.e., I want to be able to plug a phone, TV cable, computer, etc.
into one of these connectors WHEN I NEED TO and then *unplug* it,
later -- and have the connector that remains be protected thereafter
(i.e., by a watertight door, etc.)

Fri Jan 27, 2012 7:51 pm   

Hi Rich,

On 1/27/2012 6:40 AM, Rich Webb wrote:

It doesn't look like the jack is protected when *not* mated (?).
Though mated looks to be an ideal solution!

I will have to look at some dimensioned drawings to see if I
can hide it behind a conventional hinged cover or similar.

Anything *like* these for the phone and CATV?

Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:24 pm   

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 11:51:31 -0700, Don Y <this_at_isnotme.com> wrote:


They also have IP67 caps available, of course. The product's PDF flyer
has dimensioned drawings and it looks like they'd fit into a commercial
weather box.


Sure. Mil/aero/marine/industrial services use connectors designed for
harsh environments all the time. Amphenol RF is one place to start but
there are many others. Be warned that price goes up with ruggedness.

--
Rich Webb Norfolk, VA

Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:02 am   

Hi Rich,

On 1/27/2012 12:24 PM, Rich Webb wrote:


OK. Looks like they have covered the case of mated and *not* mated.
Interesting to see firewire, usb, etc. connectors offered as well.
Obviously, they are thinking in terms of equipment cases (not
"back porches"! :> )

I didn't see anything suitable for RF. E.g., F connectors.
Maybe I can find a similar bayonet connector and use that
(since the cable that mates to it will need the "weatherproof
hood", I can just as easily put a BNC connector on one end
and F on the other)


I'm looking at onesy-twosies so cost isn't a big deal.

Thanks!

Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:04 pm   

On 2012-02-09, Don Y <this_at_isnotme.com> wrote:

You won't find special weatherfproof F connectors,
because that's the only type there is.

just screw a terminator cap on it, that's what the cable guys
do on the unused ports of their splitters.

The one I found on the ground looked a bit like this,
http://search.digikey.com/us/en/products/222154/ACX1473-ND/1989922

dunno if they make a version with an O-ring inside, but if you face the jack
upwards it's not going to leak much with the cap on.






--
⚂⚃ 100% natural

--- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net/ - Complaints to news_at_netfront.net ---

Thu Feb 09, 2012 8:36 pm   

Hi Jasen,

On 2/9/2012 4:04 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:

<frown> I've looked at connectors left "out in the elements"
that don't look too good. E.g., even connectors at the masthead
have rubber hoods, etc.


I have similar terminators on my *indoor* connectors.

But dealing with the elements also involves the space *around* the
connector/bulkhead. E.g., you can put this behind a typical NEMA
"wet location" cover. But, then whatever is in the "other half"
(think: duplex receptacle) of the fixture has to be compatible with
that sort of cover. (consider the connectors Rich mentioned
previously -- I want RJ11, RJ45 and F connectors available in
each "location")

Ideally, I would like to find a "family" of connectors that
solves this same problem in similar ways -- so I can come up
with one packaging approach instead of "do this for this half
of the connection point, and THIS for the other half..."

Currently, I'm pursuing the ANCIENT "wet location" covers
(round screw on caps) so I can adopt an *indoor* connector
solution and just overlay the "wet location" caps on that.

Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:47 pm   

Don Y wrote:

I used a standard *INDOOR* wall keystone-type plate, cut down to fit within the
inside width and height of a weatherproof-while-in-use receptacle cover. I left
just enough height on the wall plate to allow me to bolt the plate to the cover.

So far it has worked admirably for over ten months.

-- Thomas

Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:25 pm   

Hi Thomas,

On 2/9/2012 1:47 PM, Thomas wrote:

[elided]


OK. In my case, I'd have to use these "component" wallplates
(i.e., mix and match various different connectors and combinations).

But, the actual wall plate is pretty *thick* (front to back).
I suspect this is because the "front surface" effectively has
to support these "plug in, modular connectors".


So, the "cap" that covers the connector is deep enough to
clear the extent that the connector protrudes beyond the
"front surface"?

Did you remove/disable the springs that would normally hold
the "cap" closed (protecting the connector)? (all of the
covers I've seen -- that *seal* -- are spring-loaded)

If so, how effective is the seal without the spring tension?

If *not*, how do you handle the stress that it puts on the
"back side" of the cable-to-connector joint of the *mating*
cable? That was the problem I experienced -- if I left a
cable plugged in for a prolonged time (much of the year is
temperate here so you can easily leave a phone, TV, etc.
out on the porch for months at a time), the cable became
flakey because of the constant pressure on that flex point.

I.e., if you unplugged the cable, it invariably looked like
an "L" -- with the wire being the upright portion of the L
and the connector the other! This isn't as bad for bulky
coax but was a killer for phone/network.

(I also wonder how much of this stress is transferred to
the stationary connector's contacts)

The connectors Rich pointed out were great because they
looked like they would be protected when NOT in use as well
as when *IN* use (though with that obvious "MIL feel").

Sat Feb 11, 2012 12:39 am   

Don Y wrote:

<snip>


|||||||||||||||||||||||||


Note the *weatherproof-while-in-use* above. These covers are designed to have a
power cord plugged in and the cover closed *without* placing undue stress on the
cord-to-plug area. All the ones I've seen at the hardware stores and home
centers (Lowe's, Home Depot, etc.) are transparent or semi-transparent.


The keystone plate I used (in fact all the plates I've used over the years) are
no thicker at the edges than a standard plastic indoor wall plate. The area of
the plates that the keystone-style jack (be it modular, RCA, F, etc.) is
box-shaped to accommodate the jack insert. This area extends into the box, so if
you go this route ensure the box you use is at least deep enough to account for
this as well as leaving enough room so as not to stress the connections *inside*
the box when the plate/cover assembly is screwed to the box.


Your thinking of the usual weatherproof cover, which is not allowed per the NEC
in the US except where shielded from direct exposure to rainfall, e.g
house-side wall of a porch (other countries have similar rule?).

Where exposed to direct rainfall, all receptacles must be fitted with with
*weatherproof-while-in-use* covers. (IIRC this was mandated in the NEC back in
2005).


With the spring-loaded typically gray duplex covers so abundant everywhere (and
a lot of them don't meet today's NEC in the US) I understand your thinking of
this type of cover here. I've yet to see a weatherproof-while-in-use cover
anywhere (aside from the ones I myself have installed)


This is why I used a weatherproof-while-in-use cover for my outside phone jack.
No stress on the cable-to-plug connection nor the plug-to-jack connection.


The cover I used wasn't exactly cheep: about 12USD for the one I purchased at
the hardware store. Well worth it, though.

God Bless.

--

Thomas

Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:45 am   

Hi Thomas,

On 2/10/2012 4:39 PM, Thomas wrote:


Ah, my bad.


Understood. The ones I installed for the electric outlets are made by
"Red Dot". Cast out of <something> -- both the plate and *cover*.

They come in two different orientations -- horizontal (so the "outlets"
are located side by side) and vertical (outlets above each other).
This affects where teh hinge is located.

I opted for the horizontal orientation as power cords don't have to
lay on top of each other as they try to exit the cover.

The problem with these is that they aren't "sealed" when not in use.
E.g., I've encountered AC receptacles with *plugged* ground "holes".
It appears that certain insects find places like this to lay
eggs (?) which they then "seal" in place.


These actually have reinforced areas behind the "mounting holes"
because the face of the plate (which is what the mounting screw would
bottom *into*) is so far above the "seating plane" of the plate itself.
(I noticed this when purchasing them as the plates would have cracked
from mechanical stress when "tightened down", otherwise)

I.e., I may have to just find some other plates.


Yes, I use what are called "deep" wet location boxes. A good three (?)
inches from front to back -- *plus* an additional ~3/4" "extension"
attached to the face. More space (volume) is always better than less!
Especially when you are trying to bend RG6Q *in* the box.


Understood.


I see the "spring-loaded" covers sold everywhere. Even new designs
(e.g., for GFCI's). Though the "screw on caps" from ~50 years past
seem to be gone (maybe I'll try a surplus yard).


Understood. But see above.

When I removed one of the trim boards that runs the length of the
house, it was *filled* with tightly rolled "leaf cuttings"! I
guess there is a bee/wasp that literally cuts the leaves off of
certain plants (i.e., chews across the leaf to cause part of it
to fall off) and uses it to protect its eggs?

Too many damn critters! I wonder what will happen when I move
the kiln out there?? :<

Sat Feb 11, 2012 5:41 pm   

Don Y wrote:

One detail I forgot to mention: the cover I used is the GFCI style, not the
standard duplex. By trimming the indoor keystone plate to fit the rectangular
hole in the cover and bolting the plate to the back of the cover I made a custom
weatherproof-while-in-use phone jack cover.

If I had a camera I would take a picture for you so you could see exactly what I
did (picture being a thousand words and all) but alas I'm not that fortunate...yet)

(I used an RJ-45 jack and plug; this permits not only the one voice and the DSL
lines, but allows two more voice lines in the future. I try to think ahead and
allow for future expansion/use whenever I do something like this. I felt
allowing for three voice lines was plenty. As it turned out, my wife would like
an office for her (very small at the moment) business; dedicated voice and fax
line for this can now be easily added because of my foresight.)

I Hope this helps.

God Bless.

--

Thomas

Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:08 pm   

Hi Thomas,

On 2/11/2012 9:41 AM, Thomas wrote:


<frown> I can picture the cover and "fitting" the plate into it.
But, can't see how you'd fasten them together once that is done.
I.e., the difference between the traditional duplex "wet use cover"
and the GFCI variant is (besides the shape of the hole(s)) the
presence/absence of that "cross piece" between the two outlets
(which has a mounting hole in it).

Not to worry. I will look at one of them on my next visit to
Home Despot/Glowes/Space/etc. I vaguely recall the wet use cover
having LOTS of mounting options (to the wet use junction box);
no doubt to cover different configurations that might be
encountered. So, there is probably a set of suitable holes
that you availed yourself of that I can't envision...


Understood. Inside the house, each wall plate has three connections:
phone, network and "antenna/cable". I opted to use a *red* RJ45
connector for the network connections (the wallplate itself is white;
as are the other "snap in connector modules"). I felt this would
help safeguard against "phones" being plugged into "network" outlets.
This also makes it easier to visually identify where you want to
plug in your laptop, etc.

(I have a box of ~500 such RJ45 "modules" in various colors. Red seemed
the most visually distinguishable. It *says*, "there is something
different about me; think twice before you use me!")


Yup. Originally I had a 25 pair cable connecting the telephone network
interface to the distribution panel (punchdown blocks) in the house.
When I ran the (2!) RG6Q's for the CATV feed, I opted to replace it
since I wanted to save myself the hassle of drilling another hole
through the masonry to get the wires to the outside of the house.
(the existing hole wouldn't have been large enough for the two RG6Q's
*and* the 25 pair telco cable).

I could then have chosen to run some 12 pair to replace the 25 pair.
Or, the two CAT5's. Since all of the above were more than I'd
ever *need*, the CAT5's won the day! (again, with the realization
that I could eventually put a truly high speed interface on the
other end of the wire -- when/if the "utilities" decide to move into
the 21st century)