Need help with locating thermostat

[evildberg]

I've got a customer that is looking for thermostats capable of controlling fan coil units using a standard relay output to control cooling / fan and a 0-10vdc output to control heating valves. Is anyone aware of any such products and if so could you post a link or two.

Thank you

[nikko]

I'd contact Viconics

http://www.viconics.com/vt7200.htm

I can't find it on their web site (2-second look) but I'm pretty sure they have what you need.

Good luck
Nikko

[amigo]

http://www.kele.com/olcat/TC11/T155_t167.pdf

[Control Man]

TCS/Basys Model SZ 1060

http://www.tcsbasys.com

[frich]

Viconics' VT7300 will do the job - available with a Lon module, a BACnet module or stand-alone application.

http://www.viconics.com/vt7300.htm

Frich

[qtip]

Originally posted by frich
Viconics' VT7300 will do the job - available with a Lon module, a BACnet module or stand-alone application.

http://www.viconics.com/vt7300.htm

Frich

Looks like a nice device, any idea on pricing?

[sysint]

About the cost of a standard ASC type controller.

The world according to Sysint.
LONfieldbus = Good
bacnetMSTP = Subpar fieldbus
Tridium > bacnet
Lonworks > proprietary bacnet
Peer to peer device level control architecture is better than supervisory controller architecture.
Lonworks can be peer to peer device level control. bacnet isn't.
Qtip can't handle the truth.

[shylock]

Originally posted by sysint
Lonworks can be peer to peer device level control. bacnet isn't.
Viconics do have BACnet thermostats, which are almost identical to LON ones.
Why exactly MS/TP is worse than EIA-709? Could you give some tehnical explanation?

[qtip]

Originally posted by sysint
About the cost of a standard ASC type controller.

The world according to Sysint.
LONfieldbus = Good
bacnetMSTP = Subpar fieldbus
Tridium > bacnet
Lonworks > proprietary bacnet
Peer to peer device level control architecture is better than supervisory controller architecture.
Lonworks can be peer to peer device level control. bacnet isn't.
Qtip can't handle the truth.

When are you going to understand that there is more than one protocol and there always will be?

Get over it (http://webpages.charter.net/tdq31/worldfavor.wav)

[frich]

Qtip,

Price varies according to the model you choose (Lon, BACnet or stand-alone,floating or analog outputs, etc).

I would suggest you call your nearest distributor:

http://www.viconics.com/authorized_distributor_us.htm

Frich

[cacontrolgirl]

These guys have really good pricing and service on Viconics
http://www.controlsconnection.com/

I do not work for them...we buy from them, among other vendors..

[sysint]

Originally posted by shylock

Originally posted by sysint
Lonworks can be peer to peer device level control. bacnet isn't.
Viconics do have BACnet thermostats, which are almost identical to LON ones.
Why exactly MS/TP is worse than EIA-709? Could you give some tehnical explanation?

http://www.grahamcontrols.com/LWOverview.htm

Here is one excerpt:
Access Method
In any network, there must be a mechanism for gaining access to the bus so that your device can send a message. There have been many different access methods researched and implemented in the past. Methods like token passing, ALOHA schemes, master slave polling, time division multiplexing, Carrier Sense Multiple Access (CSMA) etc. The problem with many of them is that they are not scalable. For example, it might be fine to pass a token around a network of 20 devices, but what happens when the network grows to 200 devices, 2000 devices and beyond? Quite simply the network becomes unusable at that point.

[sysint]

When are you going to understand that there is more than one protocol and there always will be?

Perfectly aware of that. One's better than the other.

I'm also aware of a guy who can't let go and has to go around with some sort of personal attraction to a guy with a definite opinion and the information to back it up. I could see why you find being straightforward and consistent attractive, but you have to move on. Restraining order to follow....

[qtip]

Originally posted by sysint
When are you going to understand that there is more than one protocol and there always will be?

Perfectly aware of that. One's better than the other.

In your opinion, both work well if implemented properly.


guy with a definite opinion and the information to back it up. [/B]

Love the quotes from all the different sites


Restraining order to follow.... [/B]

LOL!!!

[sysint]

In your opinion, both work well if implemented properly.

It's fact that the Lonworks fieldbus (FT-10) is far more robust and scaleable than bacnet MS/TP. (See above)

So, install a MS/TP with 200 nodes and let me know how that goes - how long you wait for information, or collision issues.

Good thing Trane field offices are more of a good old boy network and don't worry about those 'confounded technology issues'.

Instead of your wrong opinion and my correct assertion - some facts from Graham (since he is so eloquent):


For a very low cost, the LonTalk protocol provides an implemented, debugged, maintained, and proven protocol. It implements functionality of the full 7 layer OSI protocol standard. Most of the competing standards only implement a portion of the OSI stack. Commonly, layers 1,2, 3 and 7 are implemented in most standards. While this might be ok for a small static application, it is rarely sufficient for dynamic networks. By leaving out those middle layers, you leave out important services necessary for the growth of a network. Services such as duplicate packet detection, packet routing, sender authentication etc are now left as an exercise for the reader.

LonTalk protocol utilizes information in the protocol and message headers to predict message traffic and dynamically increase or decrease the number of randomization slots. So as traffic increases, the number of slots increases. As traffic decreases, the number of slots decreases. The net result is that when traffic increases, the probability of two or more devices picking the same randomization slot remains low. Looking at the performance curve, the LonTalk protocol provides a linear response to offered traffic. Unlike the hockey stick curve of Ethernet, which has 100% collisions at 40% bandwidth utilization, the LonTalk protocol statistically has less than a 4% collision rate even at 100% bandwidth utilization. This means that collisions will increase as traffic increases but only marginally and that the network will continue to operate and deliver messages. .........The LonTalk protocol also allows for priority message slots. You can define slots in which no other device can randomize in to. Those priority slots can be reserved for those key messages (train brake message) that must have access no matter how busy the network is.

Further - Every Neuron can be assigned two logical addresses. With that, a Neuron can belong to two different logical networks. An example use of that would be to assign a meter in the house to a Utility domain and to a home domain. Or devices in a building could be assigned to a building supervisor domain and to a floor domain.

The three part addressing provides flexibility in addressing schemes. You can address every device in the network by using the Domain ID. You can talk to a specific device by using its Subnet/Node ID or you can talk to a collection of devices in a subnet by using the Subnet ID

I'm waiting to hear all the shining benefits and superiority of bacnet MS/TP from you Qtip. Get 'R' Done.

[hvac_czar]

Originally posted by evildberg
I've got a customer that is looking for thermostats capable of controlling fan coil units using a standard relay output to control cooling / fan and a 0-10vdc output to control heating valves. Is anyone aware of any such products and if so could you post a link or two.

Thank you

http://customer.honeywell.com/honeywell/ProductInfo.aspx/T7350M1008

No need to go crazy boys... Nobody said we wanted to network 'em... Even thought you can with this one!

[shylock]

Originally posted by sysint http://www.grahamcontrols.com/LWOverview.htm

Here is one excerpt:
Access Method
In any network, there must be a mechanism for gaining access to the bus so that your device can send a message. There have been many different access methods researched and implemented in the past. Methods like token passing, ALOHA schemes, master slave polling, time division multiplexing, Carrier Sense Multiple Access (CSMA) etc. The problem with many of them is that they are not scalable.

Thanks for an answer, but...

Do you (or author) mean, that CSMA is just better than token passing, because "they are not scalable"? Any proof or demonstration? As far as I know CSMA performs quite bad on big networks.


It's fact that the Lonworks fieldbus (FT-10) is far more robust and scaleable than bacnet MS/TP. (See above)
This is not the fact, just an assertion. The facts should be proven.


So, install a MS/TP with 200 nodes and let me know how that goes - how long you wait for information, or collision issues.
It is not possible to install 200 nodes on a single FT-10 segment or on a single LON subnet. So why LON is better?