Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]()
posted to comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware,rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... Hi Guys, I need to get a VGA signal from the Nav Station in my boat to the monitor in the bridge. I could just run a VGA cable (about 4m worth) but I need to pass the cable through some small holes for the looming (sp?) and the DB15 connectors wont fit unless I make the hole bigger. I am thinking about running the VGA singal over CAT5e, which a Google search seems to suggest is possible. I was wondering if anyone had any better ideas, keeping costs fairly low. Has anyone here had any success cutting the end off a VGA cable and wiring on a new DB15 for example? Thanks in advance, -Al VGA cable is shielded and CAT5 is not, so you would get some horrible ghosting. BTW, there may still be some ghosting even with VGA cable |
#2
![]()
posted to comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware,rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "philo" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... Hi Guys, I need to get a VGA signal from the Nav Station in my boat to the monitor in the bridge. I could just run a VGA cable (about 4m worth) but I need to pass the cable through some small holes for the looming (sp?) and the DB15 connectors wont fit unless I make the hole bigger. I am thinking about running the VGA singal over CAT5e, which a Google search seems to suggest is possible. I was wondering if anyone had any better ideas, keeping costs fairly low. Has anyone here had any success cutting the end off a VGA cable and wiring on a new DB15 for example? Thanks in advance, -Al VGA cable is shielded and CAT5 is not, so you would get some horrible ghosting. BTW, there may still be some ghosting even with VGA cable STP CAT5e or CAT 6 would do the trick, and at these lengths the cost difference isn't an issue. -John O |
#3
![]()
posted to comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware,rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
JohnO wrote:
"philo" wrote in message (snip) VGA cable is shielded and CAT5 is not, so you would get some horrible ghosting. BTW, there may still be some ghosting even with VGA cable STP CAT5e or CAT 6 would do the trick, and at these lengths the cost difference isn't an issue. There might be a minimum amount that they will sell, but the real problem isn't shielding but impedance and balanced/unbalanced line. If you transition from a balanced line (UTP) to an unbalanced line (coax), unless exactly impedance matched, it won't work right. UTP cable depends on the voltage and currents on the two wires being exactly opposite to cancel out and not radiate the signal. Coax depends on the voltage on the shield being zero. To couple between them you either need a transformer (if there is no DC component), or active circuitry such as differential amplifiers. VGA has a DC component so you can't use transformers. -- glen |
#4
![]()
posted to comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware,rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: JohnO wrote: "philo" wrote in message (snip) VGA cable is shielded and CAT5 is not, so you would get some horrible ghosting. BTW, there may still be some ghosting even with VGA cable STP CAT5e or CAT 6 would do the trick, and at these lengths the cost difference isn't an issue. There might be a minimum amount that they will sell, but the real problem isn't shielding but impedance and balanced/unbalanced line. If you transition from a balanced line (UTP) to an unbalanced line (coax), unless exactly impedance matched, it won't work right. UTP cable depends on the voltage and currents on the two wires being exactly opposite to cancel out and not radiate the signal. Coax depends on the voltage on the shield being zero. To couple between them you either need a transformer (if there is no DC component), or active circuitry such as differential amplifiers. VGA has a DC component so you can't use transformers. -- glen You can use a transformer, but wired as a *balun* (coils in series with the lines instead of across them); this provides the required impedance transformation while still passing DC. -- Rich Seifert Networks and Communications Consulting 21885 Bear Creek Way (408) 395-5700 Los Gatos, CA 95033 (408) 228-0803 FAX Send replies to: usenet at richseifert dot com |
#5
![]()
posted to comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware,rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rich Seifert wrote:
(snip) You can use a transformer, but wired as a *balun* (coils in series with the lines instead of across them); this provides the required impedance transformation while still passing DC. So that is how they do it. TV baluns, from 300 ohm balanced to 75 ohm coax, don't do that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balun Does that restrict which impedance transformation you can make? -- glen |
#6
![]()
posted to comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware,rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: Rich Seifert wrote: (snip) You can use a transformer, but wired as a *balun* (coils in series with the lines instead of across them); this provides the required impedance transformation while still passing DC. So that is how they do it. TV baluns, from 300 ohm balanced to 75 ohm coax, don't do that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balun Does that restrict which impedance transformation you can make? The impedance transformation is determined by the winding ratio, regardless of whether the coils are in series or parallel with the lines. Putting the balun in series provides better low-frequency response (down to DC), but of course this configuration does not provide any electrical isolation. It functions very much like a common-mode choke, with an impedance change. -- Rich Seifert Networks and Communications Consulting 21885 Bear Creek Way (408) 395-5700 Los Gatos, CA 95033 (408) 228-0803 FAX Send replies to: usenet at richseifert dot com |
#7
![]()
posted to comp.dcom.lans.ethernet,24hoursupport.helpdesk,microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware,rec.boats.cruising
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"philo" writes:
wrote in message ... Hi Guys, I need to get a VGA signal from the Nav Station in my boat to the monitor in the bridge. I could just run a VGA cable (about 4m worth) but I need to pass the cable through some small holes for the looming (sp?) and the DB15 connectors wont fit unless I make the hole bigger. I am thinking about running the VGA singal over CAT5e, which a Google search seems to suggest is possible. I was wondering if anyone had any better ideas, keeping costs fairly low. Has anyone here had any success cutting the end off a VGA cable and wiring on a new DB15 for example? Thanks in advance, -Al VGA cable is shielded and CAT5 is not, so you would get some horrible ghosting. Thethe wrong cable impedance and lack of shileding between RGB signals will not cause ghosting. Most ghosting will be caused by the impedance mismatches. The lack of shield in cable will cause that that cable will pick up more easily external interference and will radiate out more RF interference and properly shielded VGA cable. BTW, there may still be some ghosting even with VGA cable True. The VGA cables vary in quality. The good ones are good but there are also bad ones. One thing to keep in mind in VGA connections is that it is a good idea to keep the number of VGA connectors along the link minimum (ideally only at source and destination), because the VGA connector impedance is not exactly 75 ohms as the system is designed for, and having many such wrong impedance connectors on the way will cause impedanc mismatches that cause reflections. For VGA cables is best to use a correct length cable in the beginning, and avoid using orignal cable + extension cable combinations. -- Tomi Engdahl (http://www.iki.fi/then/) Take a look at my electronics web links and documents at http://www.epanorama.net/ |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|