Yea... Not really the same thing. I am talking certify not map. I am going to have to do some deep diving into the standards to do it I am sure. For instance, the most common test that CAT5 fails and CAT6 doesn't is the DB loss test on my fluke. The pi doesn't do analog so I know I'll need an ADC. I'll have to take a closer look at my fluke tomorrow and see what all it tests.
If I can get past that might be neat to add some stuff like MOS scores or some such. On Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 9:15 PM Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> wrote: > https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=54830 > > > Jaime Solorza > > On Dec 26, 2017 8:08 PM, "Lewis Bergman" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I now have a couple of projects for raspberry pi after my first time >> success. >> >> I was wandering what else might be good. I thought about my 8000 dollar >> fluke cable certifier and wonder how much of it's functionality could be >> duplicated by a pair of raspberry pi. >> >> I found a project called netpi which is more of a network tester but had >> some neat stuff. I think it would require a couple of ADC and RTC to do a >> bunch of the tests that my fluke does off the top of my head just to start >> with. I am not sure it is even possible, at least by me, but it seems like >> a worthwhile endeavor if it is possible. I am hoping to get some feedback >> from the genius pool who know a lot more than I about the low level phy >> stuff. >> >> The goal would be to actually be able to certify a cable, not just pair >> map and give distance to fault. I know some python but this would likely >> require many tests to run in something like C for speed I would assume. >> >> Thoughts? >> >
