Douglas Lighting

[RSmike]

Has anyone done a lighting integration with Douglas Lighting? I'd be intestered in hearing from those that have worked with Douglas.

I have two choices with Douglas. I can directly run their relay scanners using their LON based communcations or I can connect their stuff on its own network and use their gateway to command their stuff.

If I directly talk to their stuff they have some nice Px views to configure groups and command relays. However commanding the groups and group status is limited and difficult to obtain. If I use their gateway device I lose the ability to configure their hardware through Tridium but I gain the abilty to very easily command groups as well as pick up their status. ARG!! I want both.

No one makes a really simple low cost lighting panel that is just simple. They all want to get complicated with their own stuff. We are about ready to just buy the relay portion and wire up our own LON controllers. It shouldn't be so diffficult to turn relays on and off.

(For those using the current Px view from Douglas I discovered and alerted them to a bug on relay #14. On turns the relay OFF and off turns that relay on. It's just a wiresheet issue)

RSLater,
RSmike

[MatrixTransform]

If it is LON then the JACE(or whatever) can simply be another node....maybe you can do both methods.

[RSmike]

Unfortunately it's not the case. Their gateway has some abilities that their individual nodes do not. Hence my problem.

The individual nodes do not have a way to access the status or groups. With the individual nodes it's necessary to send out commands to each group as well as send out commands to retrieve status.

The gateway gets into their network and must pull in all the status and ability to command through individual NVIs.

RSlater,
RSmike

[sysint]

Unfortunately it's not the case. Their gateway has some abilities that their individual nodes do not. Hence my problem.Now you know what it is like when non-Tboxers run across a JACE.

Maybe you should go a different route completely and look into DALI. Personally, I think it is a better way to go for the electrician and the integrator.
We have BACnet/DALI, LON/DALI (LNS or not) that is easy to setup. DALI is significantly more powerful than relay based systems.

[s2sam]

Has anyone done a lighting integration with Douglas Lighting? I'd be intestered in hearing from those that have worked with Douglas.

I have two choices with Douglas. I can directly run their relay scanners using their LON based communcations or I can connect their stuff on its own network and use their gateway to command their stuff.

If I directly talk to their stuff they have some nice Px views to configure groups and command relays. However commanding the groups and group status is limited and difficult to obtain. If I use their gateway device I lose the ability to configure their hardware through Tridium but I gain the abilty to very easily command groups as well as pick up their status. ARG!! I want both.

No one makes a really simple low cost lighting panel that is just simple. They all want to get complicated with their own stuff. We are about ready to just buy the relay portion and wire up our own LON controllers. It shouldn't be so diffficult to turn relays on and off.

(For those using the current Px view from Douglas I discovered and alerted them to a bug on relay #14. On turns the relay OFF and off turns that relay on. It's just a wiresheet issue)

RSLater,
RSmike

Good day RSMike,

I have done a number of integrations of Douglas devices over the years. Mainly these involved the integration the Douglas WRS-2224 lighting scanners, etc onto JCI's N2 bus (via NCMs, NAEs, N30s, FX 40/60s, etc) in order to have JCI's (or other) BMS having control/status of the Douglas scanners. To do this I had to design a JCI N2 bus to Douglas gateway, as Douglas did not have a suitable device nor were they interested in doing this (their preference was to have a separate system independent of the building's BMS). Because of the "players" involved, Douglas provided with the their protocol, etc in order for me to design a suitable gateway... That being said, Douglas's zone/grouping logic was somewhat different to that what JCI wanted or what was understood by the typical building operator. Consequently, I had to create a more suitable zone/grouping mechanism within the gateway to accommodate the customers needs.

I have not had any experience with Douglas's own front-end and so I cannot comment or assist you there, but can provide some insight/experience on some of their back-end gear if needed.

Cheers,

Sam

[s2sam]

Now you know what it is like when non-Tboxers run across a JACE.

Maybe you should go a different route completely and look into DALI. Personally, I think it is a better way to go for the electrician and the integrator.
We have BACnet/DALI, LON/DALI (LNS or not) that is easy to setup. DALI is significantly more powerful than relay based systems.

Good day Sysint,

Indeed DALI is a nice standard and has a lot of good things about it. In fact in an upcoming lighting project we will be including DALI support, but also 0-10V, to give the customer the greatest flexibility. Now my experience is no way scientific nor completely reflective of the market, but the DALI based gear I looked at (dimmable ballasts) are roughly 30% more than the 0-10V. This may or may not be an issue for some, but is a concern for our customers. Perhaps you can experience is different and if so perhaps you can comment further?

As to the original poster's project, etc... we do not know what his infrastructure is or if this is a retro-fit. Depending upon what he is looking to do a relay based system may be more cost effective? Hard to say without more info.

Cheers,

Sam

[Froz'ninWpg]

Hi RSMike, the last Douglas Lighting job we did with ripped out the Douglas Lighting boards and installed Triatek panels. All relays stayed in place. WE then used a JCI front end and using the N2 bus added the Triatek panels. The Triatek retrofit kits are great, they send you the programming tool. Easy to learn, easy to use and the integration was easy. We then used the power of the JCI system to do all the programming.
Hope this helps.

[sysint]

Good day Sysint,
Indeed DALI is a nice standard and has a lot of good things about it. ...now my experience is no way scientific nor completely reflective of the market, but the DALI based gear I looked at (dimmable ballasts) are roughly 30% more than the 0-10V. This may or may not be an issue for some, but is a concern for our customers. Perhaps you can experience is different and if so perhaps you can comment further?DALI ballasts are more expensive. My only real speculation is the manufacturers are capitalizing on the extra energy savings potential because there is not really any reason for this on the hardware side I can see.

0-10v is centrally wired to controllers. DALI is 2wire free topology wired.
So, I think physical installation wiring is less expensive with DALI. I have one controller for over 240 ballasts. Probably you have more controllers per the same number of ballasts to control. OR, you have something requiring physical reassignment anytime you want to do something new.

I also get support for emergency lighting, ballast and lamp failure notification, KW use, individual lamp run time hours and very easy zoning and regrouping features. 0-10v is really unidirectional. You don't get those features. And, probably the biggest and best feature for dimming systems - controlling lamp burn-in time.

Once a DALI system is in place there is not really a future need for an electrician to change spaces, combine offices, etc...

Anyway, with the extra energy savings and easy new construction installation and choice of using multiple manufacturers products the only thing holding it back are the manufacturers and lousy lighting agents you find in the industry. Some of these lighting agents wouldn't think twice about selling their mother if they could nail down the next project. They want you to have a really closed system so they can continue to be your lighting pimp daddy.

And either DALI or 0-10v with constant light control kicks relay based systems behinds. I have a customer who retrofitted an interior office space with DALI and with no windows light levels went down 35%. Your relay based system isn't going to deliver on that.

[MatrixTransform]

Unfortunately it's not the case. Their gateway has some abilities that their individual nodes do not. Hence my problem.


Use 2 Lon cards...1 to the gateway, the other direct to the field

Why cant you have both the Douglas Gateway AND the Douglas field LON connected to your controller (JACE?)... is the Douglas LON field lan a Transformer coupled bus or is it FT?

Oh ok...I just looked...their field is FTT-10....

I may be wrong but I reckon a single Lon card in a JACE would successfully co-exist in 2 domains and would communicate to both the Gateway and to the field. if not, then use 2x lon cards in the JACE.

[s2sam]

DALI ballasts are more expensive. My only real speculation is the manufacturers are capitalizing on the extra energy savings potential because there is not really any reason for this on the hardware side I can see.

0-10v is centrally wired to controllers. DALI is 2wire free topology wired.
So, I think physical installation wiring is less expensive with DALI. I have one controller for over 240 ballasts. Probably you have more controllers per the same number of ballasts to control. OR, you have something requiring physical reassignment anytime you want to do something new.

I also get support for emergency lighting, ballast and lamp failure notification, KW use, individual lamp run time hours and very easy zoning and regrouping features. 0-10v is really unidirectional. You don't get those features. And, probably the biggest and best feature for dimming systems - controlling lamp burn-in time.

Once a DALI system is in place there is not really a future need for an electrician to change spaces, combine offices, etc...

Anyway, with the extra energy savings and easy new construction installation and choice of using multiple manufacturers products the only thing holding it back are the manufacturers and lousy lighting agents you find in the industry. Some of these lighting agents wouldn't think twice about selling their mother if they could nail down the next project. They want you to have a really closed system so they can continue to be your lighting pimp daddy.

And either DALI or 0-10v with constant light control kicks relay based systems behinds. I have a customer who retrofitted an interior office space with DALI and with no windows light levels went down 35%. Your relay based system isn't going to deliver on that.

Good day Sysint,

Thanks for the response! Very informative!

Indeed, 0-10 has its issues and within the project we have some different approaches in order to overcome these. Obviously any particular device/topology/technology cannot accommodate all possible scenarios and so we are targeting the typical arrangement of our customers. However, your points on DALI are well taken and are indeed valid arguments given a straight forward/abstract comparison.

As for cost differential between 0-10 and DALI... My feeling is that it must be based upon the production volumes of each products produced. Electronically there is not a dramatic difference between the two other than the DALI having slightly more complexity, components, assembly costs (i.e. programming of the embedded controllers). However, once production volumes increase, the cost difference will start to minimize out. Given this, I would guess that the manufacturers produce a lot more 0-10 than DALI based products and so the price premium(?). I know in Europe DALI is used a lot more than here in North America, but what I do not know is the actual numbers either here or in Europe. Interestingly in Asia, at least my experiences anyway, DALI and even 0-10 is not a big concern... Dimming to the vendors I spoke to was not even on their radar... I actually had to explain why one would want to dim lights, etc to several large manufacturers. After seeing Hong Kong, etc you can understand why as they consume power like I have never seen.

As for relay based systems... Indeed you will not get an argument on these if one compares them on a functional and technical one. However, I know of several sites/customers where the project requirements (dimming not required) and/or end-cost prohibits a full migration. It is true that in these cases the full energy-savings/improved functionality are not maximized, but for some this is not paramount... only what scenarios provide a suitable economic payback over some reasonable time. Thus, my comment about not ruling out anything until the scope of the project is fully understood.

Cheers,

Sam

[RSmike]

Thanks for all the comments folks.

This is for a mfg facility. 180k sq ft. Already has lighting fixtures installed. I'm just looking for basic relay control.

I'll have to try some of the tips about using the Douglas gateway. They are shipping a gateway to me. I already have some of their stuff.

I have to say. There aren't a lot of simple lighting systems out there that just interface nicely to a JACE. Simple....and nicely. I support 4-5 lighting systems mfgs are our site and they are overly complicated with features, hardware, and/or quirks.

Douglas is ALMOST exactly what I've been looking for....

thanks for the tips guys.

RSlater,
RSmike

[s2sam]

Thanks for all the comments folks.

This is for a mfg facility. 180k sq ft. Already has lighting fixtures installed. I'm just looking for basic relay control.

I'll have to try some of the tips about using the Douglas gateway. They are shipping a gateway to me. I already have some of their stuff.

I have to say. There aren't a lot of simple lighting systems out there that just interface nicely to a JACE. Simple....and nicely. I support 4-5 lighting systems mfgs are our site and they are overly complicated with features, hardware, and/or quirks.

Douglas is ALMOST exactly what I've been looking for....

thanks for the tips guys.

RSlater,
RSmike

Good day RSMike,

Douglas does make some good products and their relays, switches, etc are one of the most reliable I have seen and heard of and also have some cool functionality:

a. led status on the switches that uses using parasitic "tickling" current through the low voltage side of the relay
b. Mechanical indication of relay status
c. Manual control of the relays in addition to electronic control

Their low-voltage interface module (WR-ASCII which is an RS-485 interface using a proprietary Douglas protocol) was not well designed and had issues with long cable runs and susceptibility to electrical noise... which would lead to premature failure.

Their BACNet module looks like it was much better designed and the site where I know a bunch that have been installed, seem to work just fine. In fact, they use this interface tied to a FX-60 if I remember correctly.

I have not had any experience with their LON interface, but suspect that it should work well, as I seem to remember that this was the first interface that they offered.

Cheers,

Sam

[Maxtaf]

I've actually done a fair amount of work with the Douglas Panels, and specifically the Tridium interface. It has required a fair amount of tweaking the code that Douglas provides, as there are issues with Douglas' Tridium interface.

What specifically are you attempting to do with commanding the relays? I have worked out some workarounds for the issues that might help.

Maxtaf

[RSmike]

I'm playing around with individual relay control of their 2224 relay scanner via a 2624 network node. Also group control

I'm also using group control. Their latest .jar has a pretty nice interface for configuring groups but the control of the groups means I have one NVI to turn groups on and off. The result is I've had to write some polling logic to send out these commands.

Individual relay control seems a little slow. What have you done to get over the throughput issues? When I turn on 12 individual relays they are slow to turn on. Unlike when I command them 'on' using group control;they turn on in quick order.

Ideally I'd like to have individual control and status of groups. Right now the way things are set up is they have one pipeline into the group commands.

I'm in converstations with Douglas now and they are interested in helping come up with something better.

RSlater,
RSmike

[s2sam]

<snip>

Individual relay control seems a little slow. What have you done to get over the throughput issues? When I turn on 12 individual relays they are slow to turn on. Unlike when I command them 'on' using group control;they turn on in quick order.

Ideally I'd like to have individual control and status of groups. Right now the way things are set up is they have one pipeline into the group commands.

I'm in converstations with Douglas now and they are interested in helping come up with something better.

RSlater,
RSmike

Goods day RSMilke,

This is just a guess, but...

The wrs-2224 has the group programming done on the scanner. Consequently when you command a group it is the scanner that turns on the relays and so there is no network overhead (i.e. the network simply sends a group On/Off command, but it is the scanner that controls the relays). Alternatively, if you turn on/off the relays individually (via the network), the network may be sending individual commands for each and every relay which may explain why it takes longer to do it this way.

Cheers,

Sam

[RSmike]

Sam - yeah I'm pretty sure that's the case.

I'm hoping Douglas will expose more control on their groups to individual NVIs. That would be nice. Assign relays to groups...fire the groups. DONE.

Their JAR has a 'nice' PX view that let's groups be assigned.

RSlater,
RSmike

[Maxtaf]

I had serious issues with individual relay control. If I even had the proxy control points in the folder, then I would get odd problems, like the entire panel shutting off after a reboot.

I solved some of this by creating 24 groups, Group1 = relay 1, group 2 = relay 2, etc. My real groups, I started numbering at 25. This gave me individual control, even if it was unwieldy. I also had issues with the way Douglas chose to transmit group info, as 2 separate points. I added the kitLon.jar to my JACE, and replaced the 2 individual points with a sinigle structured SVNT LonPoint. I have found it to be much more reliable. The biggest issue with doing that is that it takes 2-4 seconds to send the SNVT, so you have to write the code to stagger the automated firing of groups that have the same start or end time (i.e., two groups that both turn on at 0800). Not a big deal, just tedious.



As far as the amount of time it takes to switch relays, since I don't actually hit the relays themselves, I can only guess, but I'd say you should look at network traffic. Changing one group of 12 relays is one command over the network, where 12 separate relays is 12 individual commands.

Maxtaf

[Maxtaf]

Be careful of the group creation, BTW. There is an error in the logic that Douglas provided (it might have gotten corrected in a newer jar release, because I did inform Douglas of the issue, but I haven't seen it yet).

Under the GroupCfg folder /Drivers/LonNetwork//WNX2624/points/GroupCfg, there are 3 folders, 8Relays1, 8Relays2, and 8Relays3. Under each there are 2 folders, Dec2Hex and Dec2Hex1. In each of these subfolders, there is a GreaterThan block. As provided, InB was 8. It should be 9, or the decimal to Hex translation makes an error, and translates 9 into a.

If you have any groups that you command on, and the wrong relay triggers (group includes relays 1 and 4, but triggers 2 and 4), this very well might be your issue.

It's easy to fix, but a nightmare if you don't know it's there.

Hope this helps someone.

Maxtaf

[sysint]

Good day Sysint,
Thanks for the response! Very informative!...
... However, once production volumes increase, the cost difference will start to minimize out. Given this, I would guess that the manufacturers produce a lot more 0-10 than DALI based products and so the price premium(?). I know in Europe DALI is used a lot more than here in North America, but what I do not know is the actual numbers either here or in Europe. Interestingly in Asia, at least my experiences anyway, DALI and even 0-10 is not a big concern... Dimming to the vendors I spoke to was not even on their radar... I actually had to explain why one would want to dim lights, etc to several large manufacturers. You are welcome. I think Tridonic went into the US market too soon and didn't stay long enough. So, this ended up an issue. But, on new construction DALI should really be a no-brainer. However, it isn't bad on retrofit because you get an extra 20% savings because of constant light control and it is easier than slamming in relays and certainly more flexible.

Part of the equation with lighting in the retrofit market is that newer fixtures are more efficient at getting light where it needs to be. Oftentimes the fly-by-night ballast changers arrive along with the relay slammers and they get that cheap 15-20% savings and call it a day.

[RSmike]

Maxtaf - I checked the wiresheet and see the greater than statements. I still see an INB with 8 in it. I did however notice a 9 on the subtract statement. I can only assume Douglas modified the logic because the relay mask comes out correct.

I also haven't had any problems assigning groups and/or any problems with relay #1 and #4.

The only bug I noticed in the latest version of their JAR, which is less than a month old, is on the PX view, the "ON" button for relay #14 really turns it off and vice versa. I mentioned this to them and they are going to update their JAR. I think I may have mentioned this already.

I like the simplicity of the Douglas system. They have my Station Bog file and are working to help come up with some controls for me. I'm trying to convince them to expose individual group control.

Thanks for the help.
RSlater,
RSMike

[RSmike]

I owe an update to Maxtaf. You were correct about the error.

We just installed seven Douglas panels. They apparently did update their .jar file at some point but then due to an error they stepped backwards and the update was lost. They were very surprised when I was having the problem you had. I changed the 8 to a 9 and life was good.

They are due to release some updates to their .jar file. They are completly updating it...I'm told. It should improve the performance and indvidual relay control. Right now relay control is somewhat "clunkly"

We are using the LON interface. WNS2624 and WNS2304 wallswitches. We have seven panels with seven switches. Using groups and the wallswitches command the network node using nviGroup.

In my opinion Douglas seems to be the only company out there that has a really easy interface the works well with Tridium without a bunch of black boxes or special software. If you just need simple group control and want to do most of the control and scheduling in Tridium I would recommend Douglas.

RSlater
RSmike