FX40 vs i.lon

[sellerdude]

Need some help fellow controls guys? Customer looking for some feature_benefit analysis of the JCI FX40 and Echelon's i.lon100 e3. Figured best place to start is to ask the experts, guys who configure and commission it everyday.:D

[skwsproul]

Ilon100 is just a ip server for your lon devices you still need a front end like symetre. FX-40 is a Tridium Jace so it is a server, front end, programming tool, and much much more.

[381engineer]

Ilon100 is just a ip server for your lon devices you still need a front end like symetre.

??? I don't believe that to be exactly true. I have an ilon and it is my front end.

This should be interesting:)

[dapper]

I've never used a 'front end' with an iLON either. An iLon does many things from scheduling, and alarming to trending and serving web pages. There is also some on-board I/O, pulse inputs and a Modbus interface.
I'm not sure what the capabilities of a Jace are but I think when you consider initial cost and software needed you will find the iLON to be feature rich for the dollar amount.

[skwsproul]

??? I don't believe that to be exactly true. I have an ilon and it is my front end.

This should be interesting:)OOPS I facked up. I forgot that Ilons do have some abilities beyond just IP but a jace (FX-40) is still way more powerful but initial training and software purchase may be a consideration.

[ddcfreek]

If youre looking to integrate LON controllers I would go with Honeywell Webs instead of FX. It will cost a little more but will work a little better. An i.lon isn't a bad choice but I don't have much experience with them.

[Chris_Worthington]

sellerdude,

I would imagine the FX40 would give you more then what you are looking for, "Endless" features of your choosing, hard to beat.

I have some user manuals, etc. shoot me an email with a server local and I will upload them for you, to big for email.

[okemechtech]

Need some help fellow controls guys? Customer looking for some feature_benefit analysis of the JCI FX40 and Echelon's i.lon100 e3. Figured best place to start is to ask the experts, guys who configure and commission it everyday. You're talking apples and oranges. :D OK

[skwsproul]

If youre looking to integrate LON controllers I would go with Honeywell Webs instead of FX. It will cost a little more but will work a little better. An i.lon isn't a bad choice but I don't have much experience with them.Same controller different licenses. Should cost about the same.That is ax versus fx.Honeywell is ax JCI is FX both tridium both owned by honeywell.

[ddcfreek]

Same controller different licenses. Should cost about the same.That is ax versus fx.Honeywell is ax JCI is FX both tridium both owned by honeywell.

I know, I've worked on both and like Honeywell's better.

[skwsproul]

I know, I've worked on both and like Honeywell's better.What did you like better? I also have worked on both. I think that they are about equal though the Honeywell controllers are easier to integrate into the jace than the JCI controllers.

[okemechtech]

Same controller different licenses. Should cost about the same.That is ax versus fx.Honeywell is ax JCI is FX both tridium both owned by honeywell. More money and more money, these two are similar. :D OK

[ddcfreek]

What did you like better? I also have worked on both. I think that they are about equal though the Honeywell controllers are easier to integrate into the jace than the JCI controllers.

I guess the main thing I like more about Honeywell's is the way they use wizards or can program controllers from the Jace. I think they would be more equal if JCI would use similar functions. I don't think they will though.

As far as controllers go, I think JCI is better hands down. They are a little harder to work with but much more flexible.

[skwsproul]

I guess the main thing I like more about Honeywell's is the way they use wizards or can program controllers from the Jace. I think they would be more equal if JCI would use similar functions. I don't think they will though.

As far as controllers go, I think JCI is better hands down. They are a little harder to work with but much more flexible.

Yes I agree 100%. I take it you have Hutchy's wizards. They are really good.

[skwsproul]

Build a multi compatible front end with more functionality than anyone else.
BRILLIANT.
Sell it to competitors with their name and license it to work with their controls.
BRILLIANT

Multiple manufacturers are starting to integrate them into their equipment, AAON, Carrier, Trane, York.
HOLY CRAP.:eek: Why go with anything else? Get the training get the software or get left in the Tridium dust.

[freddy-b]

Need some help fellow controls guys? Customer looking for some feature_benefit analysis of the JCI FX40 and Echelon's i.lon100 e3. Figured best place to start is to ask the experts, guys who configure and commission it everyday.:D

The FX-40 or FX-20 or (( FX60 ( which are far superior to 40's BTW)) Would be the choice if you have existing JCI N2 devices to integrate.

Same goes for the Staefa Jaces if you have staefa..and so on and on.

If you are wishing to integrate 3rd party proprietary stuff and there is a AX driver available for it...the AX Jaces are the way to go.

If you are Starting from scratch I would do your homework and choose wisely.

I prefer AX but that may be bias, but it is some cool stuff indeed.

[mechdorn]

I guess the main thing I like more about Honeywell's is the way they use wizards or can program controllers from the Jace. I think they would be more equal if JCI would use similar functions. I don't think they will though.

As far as controllers go, I think JCI is better hands down. They are a little harder to work with but much more flexible.
I recently tried to load the wizards from the WEBS into the into the JCI workbench. NO GO. They say it's a branding issue. I also have an associate who used Lonspec initially on the controllers and went back to them with the wizards. He said had to replace at least three controllers and several are still iffy.

[freddy-b]

I recently tried to load the wizards from the WEBS into the into the JCI workbench. NO GO. They say it's a branding issue. I also have an associate who used Lonspec initially on the controllers and went back to them with the wizards. He said had to replace at least three controllers and several are still iffy.

Ya, its stupid. They just lock themselves out of selling hardware.

Distech/Voyant cross all branding lines. Plus its good stuff. Win Win!

How did he smoke any controllers doing that?

[asdf;ljk]

I recently tried to load the wizards from the WEBS into the into the JCI workbench. NO GO. They say it's a branding issue. I also have an associate who used Lonspec initially on the controllers and went back to them with the wizards. He said had to replace at least three controllers and several are still iffy.

I think the WEBS wizards are restricted to only work with the WEBS tools.

[mechdorn]

Ya, its stupid. They just lock themselves out of selling hardware.

Distech/Voyant cross all branding lines. Plus its good stuff. Win Win!

How did he smoke any controllers doing that?
He thinks they (XL10) maybe still salvageable. He used the wizards off site. He realized he seriously screwed something up after using the wizards; it was a good drive to the site so he took some controllers with him. He said something about reverse polarity on the DIs or DOs. I was laughing too hard, he so too much into the remote thing, I'm always telling him he needs to physically get out to the jobs a little more.

[skwsproul]

Ya, its stupid. They just lock themselves out of selling hardware.

Distech/Voyant cross all branding lines. Plus its good stuff. Win Win!

How did he smoke any controllers doing that?We recently did a job with Distech and Honeywell. Honeywell did not have the controller that we needed for parts of the job, we are a Honeywell company so of course we used it where we could. Anyhow integrated it with a webs 403 and it worked pretty good I must say. I did like the Distech it was a first for us and you know how fun that can be but all is good.

[willf650]

I think the WEBS wizards are restricted to only work with the WEBS tools.

I have the wizards on a straight Vykon jace and they work.

[ddcfreek]

I have the wizards on a straight Vykon jace and they work.

I have used them on Vykon as well, I even got FX40 stations to run on WEBs software on my computer. I don't think it would run on a Jace because I think it needs the jci .dist file or the right appliance files.

I don't think I have Hutchey's wizards, what are they?

[asdf;ljk]

I have used them on Vykon as well, I even got FX40 stations to run on WEBs software on my computer. I don't think it would run on a Jace because I think it needs the jci .dist file or the right appliance files.

I don't think I have Hutchey's wizards, what are they?

If the WEBSAX wizards are truly unrestricted, then they should run on the FX. FX doesn't place any restrictions on their licensing. They might be restricted to only WEBS and Vykon. My FX license file is all wildcards:

accept.station.in="*" accept.station.out="*" accept.wb.in="*" accept.wb.out="*"/>

[ddcfreek]

If the WEBSAX wizards are truly unrestricted, then they should run on the FX. FX doesn't place any restrictions on their licensing. They might be restricted to only WEBS and Vykon. My FX license file is all wildcards:

accept.station.in="*" accept.station.out="*" accept.wb.in="*" accept.wb.out="*"/>

Then it may just need the one of the Honeywell .jar files to run. All FX's are open? Interesting...

[Chris_Worthington]

The HW Wizards will only work on the HW & Vykon "Branded" Jaces.

It has nothing to do with NIC statement, it checks the "Brand"

[skwsproul]

I have used them on Vykon as well, I even got FX40 stations to run on WEBs software on my computer. I don't think it would run on a Jace because I think it needs the jci .dist file or the right appliance files.

I don't think I have Hutchey's wizards, what are they?One of the guys, I belive at Honeywell wrote some wizards included px views for the individual HW controllers we have used some of them they work really well. I will see if I can get a link to them. I believe that they might be available through the Tridium forums.