Network Cable Testing Guide

Author: Ethan Ace, Published on Jan 22, 2015

Proper cable installation is key to trouble-free surveillance systems.

However, testing is often an afterthought, with problems only discovered when cameras have problems, resulting in increased troubleshooting, or even worse, reinstallation. Simple, inexpensive testers are available, which can easily prevent these issues without adding substantial install time.

In this guide, we examine:

  • Wiremapping
  • Cable Identification
  • Service Detection
  • PoE Detection
  • Crosstalk 
  • Propagation Delay
  • Cable Verifiers
  • Cable Qualifiers
  • Cable Certifiers
  • Choosing Between Verifiers, Qualifiers and Certifiers

****** ***** ************ ** *** ** *******-**** ************ *******.

*******, ******* ** ***** ** ************, **** ******** **** ********** when ******* **** ********, ********* ** ********* ***************, ** **** worse, **************. ******, *********** ******* *** *********, ***** *** ****** prevent ***** ****** ******* ****** *********** ******* ****.

** **** *****, ** *******:

  • ***********
  • ***** **************
  • ******* *********
  • *** *********
  • ********* 
  • *********** *****
  • ***** *********
  • ***** **********
  • ***** **********
  • ******** ******* *********, ********** *** **********

[***************]

The ***** **** **** **** *****

*********, ********** *** ********** *** *** * **** **** **** types ** ****** ****:

  • ********** *** *** **** ** *** ***** ** **** ** EIA/TIA568B *********, ***** ******* ************ ******** *** *********** ********** **** ***********. Main ******** ** **** ***** ** ~$**,***, * ** ** of * ********.
  • ********** ******* * ******** ********* **** *** ** *** *********-*********, aiming ********* ** **** * '**** *****' **** ** * lower ***** **** **********.
  • ********* ******* **** ***** ***** ******* **** ****** ****** **** as *********, ****, *** ****. ***** **** ****** ** **** the ******* ***, ** *** *** ********, ** **** * few ******* *******.

Cable *********

***** ********* ******* *** **** ****** ***** ****** ** ****** basic ***** ***********, ****** ***** ******** *** ********* **** ** manufacturer. ********* ******* ** *** ******** **** **** ******, *** one ** **** ****** *****, ******* **** *** *** *** of *** ***** ** ** ******. **** **** ***** ******* of **** ****** *** * *********.

*** **** ****** ******** ** ********* ***:

  • *******:******* ********** ******* *** ** ********** *********, **** *** ******* pairs ** *** ***** ***** ** *** *********, ********* *****/*** ****/*. **** *** ** ********* ***********, *** **** ** *******. Graphical ******* ** **** ******* ** *** *** *** *************, as ** ******** ******* ***** **** *** *** *****, *** how **** *** *******. ** *** **** ** **** ******, it ****** ***** ******* ***** *** *** ****** ******* ****** and ****** *********.
  • ******/******** ** *****:*** ******** ********** *** ****** ** ***** ** ********** *** be **** *** **** *** ****** ****. **** ******** **** shows *** ******** ** ***** ******, **** ** ****** *** shorts, ** ******* *** ** **** **** ******.
  • ***** **************:**** ****** **** *** * ****** **********, ** **** ***** may ******* ** ******** ****** ** ***** ** ****, *** *** the ******** **** ** ****** ****. **** *** ***** *************** if ****** *** ******** ** **********, ******* ** ****** ** check * ****** ***** ** * ****.
  • ******* *********:**** ****** ********* *** ****** *** *** ** ********, ***, or **** ********* ** * *****, *** ***** ***** *** used. ***** **** **** *** ****** ****** *********, ** **** show ******* * ***** ** ******* **** * ****** ** cross-connected ** * ***** ****.

********* ********* ** *** **** *** ***** **** *******, * feature ******** ***** ** ********** *** **********, ****** **** ********** are *********, **** ** *** ************ ********.

**** ***** ***** ******* *** *** ** * ******* ********. 

******* *******

***** ********* ***** ** ***** **** ***** $***-*** ***, **** cost ********* ****** ** ******* **. *** *******, ******* ****, and ****** ** *********. 

***** **** ****** **** ** *** ***** *** ** (~$*** ******) ******* * ******* ******* *** ******* ********** ** ******* compared ** *** ********* ******* ** **** ********* ******. **** fully ******** ******* **** ** *** ***** ************(~$*** ******) *** ************ ******** (~$***), ***** * ****** ********* ******* *******, ** *** ******* to **** **** *******.

********* *** ****** *** *** ********** *** ***** **** **** are **** *** * ******* ******.  **** *** **** ** report **** ****** *** *** ******** **** *** ********, ****** time ** ********* / ***************. 

**********

********** *** **** ********** *********, *** *** *** ********* ********** and ******* ** *********, ****** **** *** ****** ****** ******* verifiers *** **********.

*** ****** ********* ******* *** *******, ******, ************** *** ******* detection ** *********, *** *** ********* **** **:

  • ******* *******:******* ** ****** ********* ******** ******* ** * *****, ********** **** simple ***** ** ***** ***** ********* *** ***** ****** *** ******** whether ** **** ******* **/***, ***, ***. ***** ***** ********* include *********, ****** *** ** *** ***** * ********* *****.
  • *** *******:******* ** ****** ********** **** *** ** *******, ********** ******* measurements **** ** ******* *** ******* *******, ***** *** ******** whether * **** ** ***.*** ** ***.**, *** ************ ****** with ***** ******.
  • ***** **** *******:*** **** ******** ** ********** ****** **** ******* ** **-***** storage, ** ***** *** ** ******* *** ** ****** ** the *** ** * ******* *** *************.
  • **** ******** ********:********** ******* **** ******** ***** *********** **** *********, ******* *** estimated ******** ** *** ***** *****, *** ******* **'* * short ** ********* *****, ***** ****** ** ******* ** ******* (but *** ***) ******.

Product *******

********** *** * ***** ***** ******** **** *********. ******** ************ *** *****$*,*********, ****** *** ***** *** ***** ** ***** ******** *****, the ************. ****, **** ** *****'* ********* ** **** (~$*,*** ******), *** ****** **** ******.

********** *** *** ** ****** ********* ** ********, **** *****, the***** ********* **, *************** *** ******* ***, ***** **** ** *** **** ****** *** ******* ***** installers.

**********

********** **** ****** ******/***/*** *********, ******* * **** ******* ** *****, ********* ***** *** by ********* *** ********** (*******, ******), ***** ****** ****** *** running **** ** ***** ********* *******.

***** ***** *******:

  • *********:**** **** ******** *** ****** ** ****** ***** ** ****** from*** **** ** * ***** ** *******, ** **** *** cable ** *******. **** ******** *-* ********* ********* ***** (**** ***, *** end, ***** *********, ***.) ********* ** *** ******** ** *** cable ***** ******. ********** ****** **** ***** "*********", ******* *** of ***** ******** ************.
  • *********** *****:**** **** ** ******* ** *******, ********* *** **** ** takes *** ****** ** ***** *** *** *** ** *** cable.
  • ***** ****:**** ***** ******* *** ********** ** ***** ***** *** **** pairs ** *** *****. *********** *********** *** ******** ***** ****** or ******** ******.
  • *********/****** ****:***** *** ************ ** *** ****** **** ****** ** ********** in *** ***** *** (********* ****) ** ** ********* ****** back ** *** **** ***** (****** ****) ********* ****** ** poor ************ ** ***** ******.

**** *** ** * ******** **** ****** ******** ** * ***** *********.

Product *******

***** ********** *** *** **** ****** **** ***** *******, ********* at ***** $*,***, ****** $**,***+ ** *** ********, **** **** kits ********* ***** ***** ******** ***** ******* *** $**,***. ** addition ** ******* ****, ********** **** ** ******* ************ ************ (every *-* *****), ***** ****** **** * *** ******** ** over * ******** *******.

*** ** *** **** ****** ********** ******** *** ********** ******* such ** *****, **** * ******* ** ************* **** ***** certifiers, **** ******** *** ******** *********** *** ** *** **** ******.

What ** * ****?

** *******, *********** ****** **** ** ***** * ******** ** ****. ******* and ****** *** *** *** ******** ***** ****** ** ****** in********** *******, ***** ** ******* ***** *********. ** ** ****** for ** ***** *** ** *** ****** ** ** ************ to **** ******* ** ******* *****. ******* ** ****** ******** and/or **-*********** *** ***** ******* ********** *** *******, * ******** may **** ******* **** ** *****.

***** ***** ***-**** ******** **** *** ****** ** ******* ** may **** ** ****** ** * *********. *** ******* ** test ******** *** ******** ******* *** ** **** *** **** for ************ *** ***************, *** ** * **************, ***** **** integrators (********** ***** ****) ** *** ******* ***** ******** ** documentation.

**** ** **** ***** ****** *********** ****** ** * *********, since *** ******** ** ****** ** **** ******** ******** ** low, *** ****-***** ************* ***** *** ***** ********. ** **** instances, ********* ** **** *** ******* * ********* ** ****, and **** ******* ********** ** **** ** *** ******** *******. However, ** **** ** **** * ******** ****, ********** *** available *** **** *** * *** ******* *******, **** ***** their *** ** ****** ****, ** **** ** *** **** of *********** ***** ***********. 

Fiber *** *** *******

**** ******** *** ******* **** ***** (***/***/****, ***.), ***** ** what ** **** ******* *****. *** ***** *****, ***: ***** ***** ****** *** ************

Test **** *********

**** **** * ******** **** ***

Comments (14)

Ethan,

Nice article! Concise, with a lot of info!

At our consulting firm we require all cables to be certified, with the test results submitted prior to final acceptance. We want the cable plant to be certified because, among other reasons, we expect a minimum 15 year cable infrastructure life. In the real world that life span may be 20 or 25 years. Even in 15 years, I don’t expect we will be using 720P and 1080P cameras; we may be looking at 32K cameras, and server storage will be in the Exabytes, or maybe even in Yottabytes. They may not be even be what we recognize today as a camera, but one thing is for sure, whatever it is will require more bandwidth.

The cameras we install today will be replaced, in the lifetime of the cable plant, with technology that requires significantly higher bit rates. This will require the cable plant to perform at higher levels. So a stretched cable here, a kink there, may not matter today, but the next gen technology may well see it.

Ah, to be a pure cable geek, now that's the good life!

Questions, sir:

Do the qualifiers give a clear pass/fail indication on 'soft' errors, such as crosstalk and prop latency?

Are there certain errors that indicate the failure to be the termination at one end or the other, or the cable itself? If you reterminate and still the errors persist, should you just rip and redo, or try a different spool or ??

Should there be any consideration given to the intended usage when determining whether to rip a cable due to a 'soft' fault, e.g. Cat 6a cable only being used for 100 Mb, so cable need only perform to Cat 6 levels, etc?

Ethan, this is a great article and I'm very happy to see it.

I am left with some questions, probably because I don't perform these tests myself - the integrators or network service providers perform them for the project that I work on. I'll tell you my thoughts and then see if you think my suggestion has some merit and is feasible for IPVM to do.

This article puts the ByteBrothers RWC1000K product ("Real World Certifier") in the category of "verifier", which seems to be presented in this Guide as the lowest category of capability.

This RWC1000K's Real World Certifier – Feature Comparison page paints a better picture than that. Additionally, the Byte Brothers Pocket Cat Tester does test to the EIA/TIA568B standards.

This Testing Guide states that "Certifiers are the only of the three to test to EIA/TIA568B standards." The RWC1000K tests to IEEE/ISO/IEC 802.3 standards. They are not the same thing. The Byte Brothers Pocket CAT tester tests to test to EIA/TIA568B standards.

I am under the impression that a combination of Byte Brothers products (at around $600) would provide the same certifier" coverage as the more expensive equpment, plus provide some additional practical information that the more expensive equipment does not provide. Isn't this the case?

Here is my suggestion: Would you be able to expand this article further, maybe by making a chart that specifically compares products accross these three categories? I don't think that falls outside the scope of this article's title.

i am sure that you did not intend to make this into that kind of a research project, but I think is would be helpful if you can do it.

Also, I have not had a customer's IT department reject the test results from the Byte Brothers testers as not being up to snuff. I'm not specifically trying to promote the BB products. What I am thinking is that if a less expensive set of equipment would suffice for security system network installations, I'd hate to discourage anyone from using them if they can't affored the $4k plus category of equipment.

I am under the impression that a combination of Byte Brothers products (at around $600) would provide the same certifier" coverage as the more expensive equpment, plus provide some additional practical information that the more expensive equipment does not provide. Isn't this the case?

The problem is that not only does EIA/TIA 568.C2 define the specs of the cable, it also defines the specs of the certifying equipment itself. And unfortunately Byte Brothers uses a non-standard, digital, "real-world" way of checking everything except for the most basic verification tests. Like they say:

Unlike traditional certifiers, the RWC uses digital circuitry and digital testing techniques to perform its tasks. These tests include traditional TIA568 cable verification (length, opens, shorts, split pairs, wire map) for UTP (unshielded twisted pair) plus RWC's own sophisticated crosstalk, timing and cable parameter tests that yield a UTP cable's category (CAT3, CAT5, CAT5E, CAT6) and speed capability (10, 100, 1000 MB)! ion.

So the tool itself cannot be certified 568.C2 :( As for the Pocket Cat, it on looks to be a merely a verifier also... Whether ByteBrothers digital RW tests are as good as the analog ones or not is immaterial, as you can not officially certify using them...

Undisclosed A, thank you! That answers my questions.

Now I understand why someone would rent certifying equipment as opposed to buying the lower cost equipment. And also answers why, on a recent small project, the integrator subcontracted out the cable certification. The sales rep said that it was their standard practice to sub it out, but he didn't know the specific reasons why.

Since a collection of verifiers, no matter how good a job they do or don't do, don't meet the technical requirements for certifiers established in the standards, they can't be used where standards-based certification is required.

Anyone who actually enjoys this video showing how category wire is extruded, twisted and jacketed, is a certified cable geek...

i ate popcorn while watching that...

Having a 3rd party do the certification would be considered a plus to the end user I know some models (omni) of testers can have certain test patterns omitted from testing therefore allowing an installer who knows he has a good wiremap but may have several kinks in the cable or run near high voltage to turn off the tests that check for that. We use Fluke DTX series and completely fitted out are around $20k. Although you can make each test individually you cannot remove tests from the certification scan. Another thing to note that the article doesn't cover or I missed it is the speed in which the certifier runs. The DTX will certify the cable in under 10 seconds when you have hundred or thousands of cables this is a huge plus, not to mention built in communications between base and remote. So you can talk to your tech and tell him the problem. One thing I wish these would have is displays on both ends! That way both test people can immediately begin troubleshooting rather than waiting for the base operator to get back to the display to relay the info.

Anybody know what category this Fluke tool would fall into, it looks like it's got a few cool feautures, like uploading results to the cloud thru hotspot. But I'm not even sure it actually does a proper wiremapping test...

If there was a category for waste of money then this one would fit. It's not necessarily a cable tester rather a connectivity to the network tester, but you have all that this does with a laptop or the computer already on the desk.

This would be good to test the nic in the PC is functional or not. The only one advantage I see of this tool is it will check to see if a port is Poe enabled, but since most switches auto negotiate Poe, it's not common that this feature is turned off on port basis.

The overview doesn't show a base and remote adapter so it doesn't in anyway test the cable itself just network connectivity.

I also doubt the feature about being able to determine the switch port the cable is connected to. How would it know how many switches you have in a stack and with port of which switch it's connected. Perhaps if you have just one switch in the network closet.... And then who's switches is it compatible with does it work with intellinet? Or just big names like Cisco?

I also doubt the feature about being able to determine the switch port the cable is connected to.

I assumed it meant you hit the button, then go to the closet and observe which port light is "flukering" on and off in some kind of rhythm.

In a large video system, what would you consider to be reasonable testing protocoal to require as a part of the specficiation?

I would recommend a qualifier. It tells you the length of the cable along with a lot of other useful information. And from most of them you can download the test results.

Very good.

I've been looking into verifier vs. qualifier. I want our branch to get a qualifier, I believe that's the best bet for us to check the cables and see the length and check if there's any trouble on the line.

Login to read this IPVM report.
Why do I need to log in?
IPVM conducts unique testing and research funded by member's payments enabling us to offer the most independent, accurate and in-depth information.

Related Reports

Global Real-Time Video Surveillance - EarthNow on Apr 20, 2018
A new company, EarthNow, with backing from Bill Gates, Airbus and more, is claiming that: Users will be able to see places on Earth with a delay...
Dedicated Vs Converged Access Control Networks (Statistics) on Apr 20, 2018
Running one's access control system on a converged network, with one's computers and phones, can save money. On the other hand, hand, doing so can...
April 2018 IP Networking Course on Apr 19, 2018
This is the last chance to register for our IP Networking course. Register now. NEW - 2 sessions per class, 'day' and 'night' to give you double...
Security Camera Cleaning Frequency Statistics on Apr 18, 2018
150+ integrators told IPVM how often they clean cameras on customer's sites and why.  Inside we examine their answers and break down feedback...
Worst Access Control 2018 on Apr 18, 2018
Three access control providers stood out as providing the most problems for integrators. In this report, we analyze the answers to: "In the...
Key Control For Access Control Tutorial on Apr 16, 2018
End users spend thousands on advanced systems to keep themselves secure, but regularly neglect one of the lest expensive yet most important aspects...
Best and Worst ISC West 2018 on Apr 16, 2018
ISC West 2018 had strong attendance, modest overall new products, and a surge in Artificial Intelligence marketing. First, here are 20+...
GDPR For Video Surveillance Guide on Apr 12, 2018
The European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) comes into force on May 25, but there is much confusion and no clear guidelines on...
ISC West 2018 Access Control Rundown on Apr 06, 2018
For ISC West 2018, what is new and interesting in access control?  This rundown will bring you up to speed on the exhibitors, what they are...
VMS New Developments Spring 2018 (Avigilon, Exacqvision, Genetec, Hikvision, Milestone, Network Optix) on Apr 04, 2018
What's new with VMS software? In this report, we examine new features and releases for Spring 2018 to track different areas of potential...

Most Recent Industry Reports

May 2018 Camera Course on Apr 20, 2018
Save $50 on early registration until this Thursday, the 26th. Register now (save $50) for the Spring 2018 Camera Course This is the only...
Global Real-Time Video Surveillance - EarthNow on Apr 20, 2018
A new company, EarthNow, with backing from Bill Gates, Airbus and more, is claiming that: Users will be able to see places on Earth with a delay...
Dedicated Vs Converged Access Control Networks (Statistics) on Apr 20, 2018
Running one's access control system on a converged network, with one's computers and phones, can save money. On the other hand, hand, doing so can...
April 2018 IP Networking Course on Apr 19, 2018
This is the last chance to register for our IP Networking course. Register now. NEW - 2 sessions per class, 'day' and 'night' to give you double...
Rare Video Surveillance Fundraising - Verkada $15 Million on Apr 19, 2018
Fundraising in video surveillance (and the broader physical security market) has been poor recently. Highlights are few and far in between...
'Best In Show' Fails on Apr 19, 2018
ISC West's "Best In Show" has failed. For more than a decade, it has become increasingly irrelevant as the selections exhibit a cartoon level...
Security Camera Cleaning Frequency Statistics on Apr 18, 2018
150+ integrators told IPVM how often they clean cameras on customer's sites and why.  Inside we examine their answers and break down feedback...
Worst Access Control 2018 on Apr 18, 2018
Three access control providers stood out as providing the most problems for integrators. In this report, we analyze the answers to: "In the...
Axis VMD4 Analytics Tested on Apr 17, 2018
Axis is now on its 4th generation of video motion detection (VMD), which Axis calls "a free video analytics application." In this generation, Axis...
Arecont CEO And President Resign on Apr 17, 2018
This is good news for Arecont. Arecont's problems have been well known for years (e.g., most recently Worst Camera Manufacturers 2018 and starting...

The world's leading video surveillance information source, IPVM provides the best reporting, testing and training for 10,000+ members globally. Dedicated to independent and objective information, we uniquely refuse any and all advertisements, sponsorship and consulting from manufacturers.

About | FAQ | Contact