OPC for Building Automation

[sysint]

Automated Buildings OPC Interview (http://www.automatedbuildings.com/news/mar09/interviews/090225024753opc.htm)

Many guys question OPC because of it's roots. A couple things I noted: "The OPC UA specification comes complete with security built right in, OPC UA becomes a efficient technology to use to provide secure robust transfer of data. Let’s not forget scalability. Since OPC is an open standard maintained by the OPC Foundation, it remains a scalable technology evolving along with industry demands. OPC UA is also completely backward compatible with the current OPC specifications, so no one has to delay projects because they want the newest flavor of OPC. "

Also

That sounds like a great solution, but there would need to be a lot of interfacing between protocols. That sounds expensive?

Mandrusiak: That is the beauty of OPC technology. It was created to be cost effective. It easily interfaces with Johnson Controls devices, LON devices, BACnet devices, Modbus, PROFIBUS, the list is long. Member companies of the OPC Foundation devote considerable time and resources to developing robust interfaces to all the protocols used within the Building Automation industry, and then in keeping with the core values of OPC technology, make them off-the-shelf products.

Looking at our servers I can agree with this. They are "off the shelf", "cost effective" servers and their scalability is very high.

I think this OPC has some traction.

[leaflying]

URL need a fix (remove the last letter)

What's the unique offering of OPC UA that I cannot find in BACnet or Lon?

[sysint]

Link fixed.

Well, the point is it doesn't matter if it's bacnet or LON, etc... Let's call it the Free Framework.

So, you can have multiple vendors products on top, and more than one. Further, it's a friendlier format for business exchange of information for reporting, energy, etc...

However, I can tell you that our servers move data quickly and are extremely scalable so accessing traditional bacnet and LON sites with OPC is not a bad idea. Put it alongside a tunneled and supervised system and it's no contest. Much faster. So, I think they are on to something.

Also, you can have multiple vendors on the Free Framework with low cost devices.

[freddy-b]

A band-aid solution by your standard. Perhaps a nice band-aid, but a band-aid will always be a band-aid. Right?

[sysint]

Well, I think that if you call what you use a band-aid then yes it's a band-aid.

It's just that this band-aid moves data significantly faster and is much more scalable.

Think about it.... No supervisor necessary. Directly access multiple servers, multiple sites, multiple databases.

However, in our case our box fits in everywhere. LNS, frameworks, etc... So, from that aspect we aren't tying anybody down. For instance your system could grab the OPC or the LON. Plus you could use the IP852 routing. You have to admit that is very flexible solution with free software tools.

The point I'm trying to make is that the OPC is a good answer on top and allows for more cost effective "boxes".

[ahansen]

Has anyone implemented UA on non-Windows? I haven't kept up with OPC, but back in the DCOM days you ultimately ended up with Windows issues that neither the client nor server vendor could repair. I remember when UA came out and thinking although this is XML, but it's Microsoft XML.

[sysint]

Well, our server isn't a Windows OS.

However, we do have a .NET app for visualization.

[freddy-b]

Well, I think that if you call what you use a band-aid then yes it's a band-aid.

It's just that this band-aid moves data significantly faster and is much more scalable.

Think about it.... No supervisor necessary. Directly access multiple servers, multiple sites, multiple databases.

However, in our case our box fits in everywhere. LNS, frameworks, etc... So, from that aspect we aren't tying anybody down. For instance your system could grab the OPC or the LON. Plus you could use the IP852 routing. You have to admit that is very flexible solution with free software tools.

The point I'm trying to make is that the OPC is a good answer on top and allows for more cost effective "boxes".

OPC is a bandaid...and will aways be a poor mans...clunky way to share data in and out of applications. Its not a cure all by any means. Legacy software still to maintain, supervisors and gateways. It turns into a kluster real fast with everyone finger pointing. People dont want that. And I doubt its faster outside of lab conditions or it could be reproduced effectively in a timely fashion in the field..job in and job out.

Its a band aid that has no intent on expanding its overall capability...that will always be what it is.

To add... the scalable comment is laughable!

[sysint]

Well, I'll admit that DCOM was. This is much cleaner.

As far as scalable, honestly our boxes are significantly faster than yours and don't require a supervisor. Of course on the LON side you guys still funnel everything through the Neuron so you are limited right in the beginning. Maybe that's the bottleneck. It's like trying to suck up a lake through a straw. What do you think?

Why do you find it clunky? What makes data moving in your tunnel better on your platform? How many independent instances of companies using your tunnel?

[freddy-b]

Well, I'll admit that DCOM was. This is much cleaner.

As far as scalable, honestly our boxes are significantly faster than yours and don't require a supervisor. Of course on the LON side you guys still funnel everything through the Neuron so you are limited right in the beginning. Maybe that's the bottleneck. It's like trying to suck up a lake through a straw. What do you think?

Why do you find it clunky? What makes data moving in your tunnel better on your platform? How many independent instances of companies using your tunnel?

We don't require a supervisor.... its nice for organization of certain things but not a necessity. A supervisor is just another station among the stations same as in each jace. The Niagara network talks at the IP level..JACE to JACE... JACE to Supervisor...etc

All without the BS that comes with OPC.

I tunnel as a convenience to use legacy config tools. You Tunnel to get it to work. I have no need to tunnel for everyday use with the Niagara network. I tell Point A from JACE W to goto Jace X Point Z...Tell it how fast I want it to update depending on whats shared. Thats it, no third party crap to tell more third party crap to tell the obsolete Supervisory device to update a field controller ...then back again.


OPC is gay, Johnson went down that path 10 years ago...Its a PITA..all this while better solutions are readily available. OPC is a dead horse.

[sysint]

Seems to me somebody thinks the old boxes he was using were PITA and likes his AX significantly better...

How many JACE's points can you directly access and serve on a single page? I think some OPC benefits are the ability to source large amounts of data from multiple locations.

Sometimes I think you go rose-colored glasses mode on your stuff.

(Anyway- I'd like to push this back to an OPC discussion and not a product discussion - the article is from Matrikon and OPC foundation.)

[freddy-b]

Seems to me somebody thinks the old boxes he was using were PITA and likes his AX significantly better...

Cant argue with that.

[sysint]

Well OK - OPC XML/DA is working better than the previous methods.

[freddy-b]

How many JACE's points can you directly access and serve on a single page? I think some OPC benefits are the ability to source large amounts of data from multiple locations.

At what resolution? But the answer is .....as many that will fit on it.

[sysint]

Well this is news to me. Accessing a bunch of standalone JACES and displaying them on a single page. Interesting. Learn something new everyday. No management JACE necessary.... I've got to look into that.

[joey791]

Ok I might be slow on some of the terminology or not up to date "i.e. freddy and tunneling" or the talk about DCOM "maybe I just dont get white paper deep on this stuff". I use OPC on any job that has a front end with ASI Weblink and I've never had a problem with it. Easy to use, easy to track and from what I've been told by other ASI vars, depending on who's OPC server very easy to integrate.

[NINAX]

Since OPC is an open standard maintained by the OPC Foundation,
By my searching of the OPC Foundation, your company has no devices listed, unless you're a stealth listing. Please point me in the right direction to find your products there.



I think this OPC has some traction.
Think? I bet you mean hope.
Hope. Change. Hope. Change you can believe in. Hope.
Hey, it was able to get Obama elected, maybe it will work for you too?

[NINAX]

However, I can tell you that our servers move data quickly and are extremely scalable so accessing traditional bacnet and LON sites with OPC is not a bad idea. Put it alongside a tunneled and supervised system and it's no contest. Much faster. So, I think they are on to something.


How fast do you need to move data on a HVAC system?
Just how many updates do you need per minute, or second, on a room temp? or an actuator position?

[freddy-b]

How fast do you need to move data on a HVAC system?
Just how many updates do you need per minute, or second, on a room temp? or an actuator position?

Good point.

Perhaps Loytec has a bio-helmet hvac server interface being released soon?
http://media.techeblog.com/images/strike_1.jpg

[GregF]

Ok I might be slow on some of the terminology or not up to date "i.e. freddy and tunneling" or the talk about DCOM "maybe I just dont get white paper deep on this stuff". I use OPC on any job that has a front end with ASI Weblink and I've never had a problem with it. Easy to use, easy to track and from what I've been told by other ASI vars, depending on who's OPC server very easy to integrate.

Not the point,OPC w/ASI works well and can be integrated with the right stuff, however in building controls freddy's right, OPC has its place and I have used it often. What's not being said is you can niagara as many points as you can find in AX by using virtual points without a front end PC, so that's that. You can buy AX web for less than Matrikon sells their OPC. you can get free tools for OPC from everybody, So why go with OPC?? Can't think of one reason to go back.

Greg

[orion242]

I fail to see how mixing yet another "open" protocol into the mix will help anything.

>our servers move data quickly and are extremely scalable so accessing traditional bacnet and LON sites with OPC is not a bad idea

You cannot move any faster than the underlying networks.

>Much faster. So, I think they are on to something.

You add a step for translation and increase the speed of it? Caching the info and displaying stale values would not be a faster network IMHO. A LON / BACnet supervisor can do this without OPC.

>it's a friendlier format for business exchange of information for reporting, energy, etc...

Again I think that is a feature that is easily done in the supervisor. I would rather see all data in SQL if anything. Many supervisors already do this. Is OPC really a “friendlier format” than SQL?

[sysint]

Good point.

Perhaps Loytec has a bio-helmet hvac server interface being released soon?
Well, I'm glad you two could come together like that and form a solution. You should consider working together... what a team.

[sysint]

Not the point,OPC w/ASI works well and can be integrated with the right stuff, however in building controls freddy's right, OPC has its place and I have used it often. What's not being said is you can niagara as many points as you can find in AX by using virtual points without a front end PC, so that's that. You can buy AX web for less than Matrikon sells their OPC. you can get free tools for OPC from everybody, So why go with OPC?? Can't think of one reason to go back.GregHi Greg. You can buy three or four of our servers for a JACE 6 so I'd say they have a good price. Granted, we don't have a LON network tool inside, but we also don't charge for our config software. And it's great you can add whatever OPC clients you want... even a JACE.

[sysint]

I fail to see how mixing yet another "open" protocol into the mix will help anything. ...Again I think that is a feature that is easily done in the supervisor. I would rather see all data in SQL if anything. Many supervisors already do this. Is OPC really a “friendlier format” than SQL?You can make use of a SQL server. We do. I'm sure many others do. I think you have to also consider Profibus, Modbus, Mbus, LON, bacnet, etc... when you talk about a platform that plays nice with them all with many FREE and innovative solutions.

"You cannot move any faster than the underlying networks..." TRUE. I'll let you think about that one a bit.

[GregF]

You can make use of a SQL server. We do. I'm sure many others do. I think you have to also consider Profibus, Modbus, Mbus, LON, bacnet, etc... when you talk about a platform that plays nice with them all with many FREE and innovative solutions.

"You cannot move any faster than the underlying networks..." TRUE. I'll let you think about that one a bit.

Good point, I like OPC and how it threads to SQL. My email is in my profile please send me pricing.

Greg

[joey791]

Not the point,OPC w/ASI works well and can be integrated with the right stuff, however in building controls freddy's right, OPC has its place and I have used it often. What's not being said is you can niagara as many points as you can find in AX by using virtual points without a front end PC, so that's that. You can buy AX web for less than Matrikon sells their OPC. you can get free tools for OPC from everybody, So why go with OPC?? Can't think of one reason to go back.

Greg

Niagara points without a frontend PC-Why would anyone install a system without a front end? Even with our hard money jobs there is always enough to purchase Weblink and a new Dell?

I haven't use Matrikon's OPC server but I'm sure there are others that can be used that definitely have different pricing. The AX web is that before or after paying for Tridium licensing, is that still 25K a year?

[sysint]

The AX serves up pages you can view in your browser.

[joey791]

The AX serves up pages you can view in your browser.

Sys you are talking about the Jace correct? If you have multiple Jaces onsite can you direct all the pages through one Jace or do you have to log into each individual Jace?

[freddy-b]

The AX web is that before or after paying for Tridium licensing, is that still 25K a year?


Umm..... no its its about a twelfth of that and it covers everyone that has a copy in your Company.

A "front end" as it used to be termed is obsolete.

And yes you can have multiple points from many Jaces be served from one Jace.

I think many JACE guys...still dont know all of the power they have and do not know how to setup a site to its potential.

You guys need to dump the Mickey Mouse, dumb downed appliances that come default by many branded JACE manufacturers and use all the core Tridium features as they were meant to.

[sysint]

Sys you are talking about the Jace correct? If you have multiple Jaces onsite can you direct all the pages through one Jace or do you have to log into each individual Jace? Well, if you view pages in a browser you are going to a single location. How they are serving up the points is the question apparently. They also have something called a Supervisor.

What I want to know is how they are accessing data directly from multiple JACES since I've been corrected on this earlier. Personally, I think if you have a hundred JACE boxes you need something more than just the JACE's to make it work.

[freddy-b]

Well, if you view pages in a browser you are going to a single location. How they are serving up the points is the question apparently. They also have something called a Supervisor.

What I want to know is how they are accessing data directly from multiple JACES since I've been corrected on this earlier.

Via the Niagara Network. Just look at it as a virtual Lon bus.

[GregF]

Sys you are talking about the Jace correct? If you have multiple Jaces onsite can you direct all the pages through one Jace or do you have to log into each individual Jace?

You can direct all of the Jace's through one Jace and use only a browser. You can program and do graphic through the browser. No need for a PC unless you need to collect a lot of history's and alarm. I just did a site that dose just that. One point of contact and fly out menu's to everything. And no we don't pay 25k a year. First I have heard of that and I have been using tridium sense it came out. The report vav page has every box in the system on it (258).

On another note sysint's front end might be good for flat lon that calls for a PC.

Greg

[GregF]

Umm..... no its its about a twelfth of that and it covers everyone that has a copy in your Company.

A "front end" as it used to be termed is obsolete.

And yes you can have multiple points from many Jaces be served from one Jace.

I think many JACE guys...still dont know all of the power they have and do not know how to setup a site to its potential.

You guys need to dump the Mickey Mouse, dumb downed appliances that come default by many branded JACE manufacturers and use all the core Tridium features as they were meant to.


Thats it you got it

G

[GregF]

Well, if you view pages in a browser you are going to a single location. How they are serving up the points is the question apparently. They also have something called a Supervisor.

What I want to know is how they are accessing data directly from multiple JACES since I've been corrected on this earlier. Personally, I think if you have a hundred JACE boxes you need something more than just the JACE's to make it work.

Nope can make it work with out a PC, if need be I would add a NXS. I might add that the biggest AX job I've done had 54 jace's in it.

G

[sysint]

Then why use a Supervisor?

[sysint]

Nope can make it work with out a PC, if need be I would add a NXS. I might add that the biggest AX job I've done had 54 jace's in it. GI know of a Tridium contractor that must be up over 300 for a single customer... (it happens apparently)

[freddy-b]

Nope can make it work with out a PC, if need be I would add a NXS.

G

Too add....The speed would only be limited by the Ethernet network backbone capability.

Its really good stuff. Despite what Sys tries to make everyone believe with his half truths and some sprinkled in total BS here and there.

[GregF]

Then why use a Supervisor?

Only one reason other that spec's and thats to collect data. I do a lot of clean rooms and labs. The collect lots and lots of data (History's.Alarm's) and PC's are cheap with large hard drives.

Greg

[GregF]

Too add....The speed would only be limited by the Ethernet network backbone capability.

Its really good stuff. Despite what Sys tries to make everyone believe with his half truths and some sprinkled in total BS here and there.

I'll second that

[sysint]

You can direct all of the Jace's through one Jace and use only a browser. You can program and do graphic through the browser. No need for a PC unless you need to collect a lot of history's and alarm....On another note sysint's front end might be good for flat lon that calls for a PC.

GregWell, our servers can have many projects in them or you can have project(s) located somewhere else. Depends on what you want to do and if you are using what we supply as your access point. And, yes we play real nice with flat LON. I have had purchases of our server with routing in LNS apps that the JACE guy was divorced from except connecting with our OPC server for data. Apparently IP852 licensing is not very advantageous... (for whatever reason)

Like I said earlier, with a browser you go to one location. Everything else is tunneled. This is different than what we do. We access multiple servers directly. So, to answer Orion's earlier comments, our CEA709, IP852 and direct OPC access methods are all faster than our competition (today). We had our previous guy Al that added a unique combination of routing techniques to get around the LON bottleneck on a JACE. I wish I had some documentation on it because apparently he got something to jack things up for them. He turned Niagara into Viagara...

[GregF]

Well, our servers can have many projects in them or you can have project(s) located somewhere else. Depends on what you want to do and if you are using what we supply as your access point. And, yes we play real nice with flat LON. I have had purchases of our server with routing in LNS apps that the JACE guy was divorced from except connecting with our OPC server for data. Apparently IP852 licensing is not very advantageous... (for whatever reason)

sysint
If the jace guy could not bring in a flat lon system with your front end then its time to get a real jace guy. As for your front end I have a need for something like it for my flat lon systems. I refuse to use wonderware. So again my email is in my addy please send me pricing.

Greg

[freddy-b]

Then why use a Supervisor?

Most people don't need one.
But they get spec'd so I put them in.

Basically a large site with lots of tricked out apps that cannot be loaded into a JACE. Or jobs a Jace could do, but may take too many resources away from its primary role ..which is managing the field devices.

JACES have "stations" Supervisors have "Stations" a station is a station regardless what its in. Jaces have field busses stations usually do not, but they could if you wished.

Mainly Long term trending/alarm storage.
Centralized access points for config software that doesn't have AX plug ins.
Utility monitoring software suites can be loaded.
Preventative maintenance program interaction.
The last two is where your OPC stuff works good.

[sysint]

sysint
If the jace guy could not bring in a flat lon system with your front end then its time to get a real jace guy. As for your front end I have a need for something like it for my flat lon systems. I refuse to use wonderware. So again my email is in my addy please send me pricing.GregThere was a LNS spec and the guy thought it easier to use OPC than IP852. Made sense to me.

Anyway, you talk about Wonderware but aren't you an Iconics guy?

[GregF]

There was a LNS spec and the guy thought it easier to use OPC than IP852. Made sense to me.

Anyway, you talk about Wonderware but aren't you an Iconics guy?

I've used both for a long time as well as others. I've even used Iconics before it was Iconics. I've used wondercrap sense it came out, although it has gotten much better. I've used Inteluction (spelled that wrong) sense windows 3.1.1 and many others. I have no like or dislike for most systems. I use what is best for the owner or what he wants. I see a lot of this is best or that is best, me I don't care. If I have a system that your stuff would work well on I would use it. Like I said I like OPC, works well in the industry. When it comes to it tridium solves many many problems, so I find myself using it more often. One thing you should know, you can do flat lon in a jace or bring it in to a jace.

Greg

[sysint]

One thing you should know, you can do flat lon in a jace or bring it in to a jace.Well, yes they are special in their own way with that... Tell me about the restriction (self imposed) on their IP852 and we can also talk about those daughter boards. Not very fast compared to the competition. They tend to strangle themselves there, and you wonder why? I know you can get IP852 to work. I was at a very good East Coast Tridium Integrator and we put a JACE in our CS. Now, if they would let you open up a full unrestricted IP852 that would be nice.

[Thistler1584]

Most people don't need one.
But they get spec'd so I put them in.

Basically a large site with lots of tricked out apps that cannot be loaded into a JACE. Or jobs a Jace could do, but may take too many resources away from its primary role ..which is managing the field devices.

Please describe what's involved in managing field devices?

[digo]

Well, if you view pages in a browser you are going to a single location. How they are serving up the points is the question apparently.

Good question.

You can serve the graphics from a single JACE that subscribes to points in other JACES, regardless of protocol, via the Niagara Network.

or

You can distribute the graphs among all JACEs and implement SSO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_sign-on)
No multiple log ins.




What I want to know is how they are accessing data directly from multiple JACES since I've been corrected on this earlier. Personally, I think if you have a hundred JACE boxes you need something more than just the JACE's to make it work.

If you have that many JACEs, the cost of the Supervisor is minuscule.