Tridium and Trane HELP

[dave2142]

I know a lot of you guys really swear by the JACE and Tridium platform so I am asking for a little help. A quick breakdown is this. The major issue is that all the devices down to the VFD are totally controlled over lon no hardwire for anything.
There will not be any BCU or front end of any type on the trunk provided by us at Trane. All goes back to the JACE. How does JACE do bindings? Will it blow out the bindings I do with Rover? Am I better off using a true Lon program like one from Distech, or Circon? I did other jobs for this same project when I was at JCI and we had nothing but problems with bindings and arguements over who messed up the network and JCI uses at least an LNS program. Rover has the crap scared out of me since it does not even play well with the BCU. Any comments and help would be appreciated. I want to make this as smooth and easy for all of us. Not to mention I need to be online with Rover to even build or bind the database.

[willf650]

You can do all your bindings with rover and then have the Jace learn the link but you would probably be better off doing the binding with the Jace in the first place. Sounds like on this project there is a two part deal with you doing the controls and some one else doing the front end. Is that the case? I work for the Devil (Trane franchise office) and I would be reluctant to do any binding on a job such as this with Rover for the simple fact the if something does happen there is no quik way to restore the data base.

[sysint]

... From what I understand Tridium is supposed to work with LNS. That means that you could utilize a LNS software, make changes to the DB and the JACE would know this and vice versa. That puts each of you on equal footing.

I think if the Tridium people are using their API then it would simply wipe out your binds.

Personally, if you have a piece of this install, are providing warranties, etc.... what would be the issue with going LNS and having an accessible DB for all vendors?

That way that JACE is another device on the network....something tells me they won't want to do that - but it's more open.

See Nikko's post on the bacnet plugfest thread and you can see what I'm suggesting works easily.

EDIT: Here it is: "But four years ago I (with a couple of others) put together an LonMark ASHRAE demo that had 36 products from 21 different vendors, linked together with eight different Human Machine Interfaces (HMI’s) (come clean time - I could not remember the exact quantities so I cut and pasted this line from the press release) . In addition we had an "open port" and invited other LON vendors to see how they fit in. The thing was boring in that it just worked. - even full-on multi-vendor integration with access control systems triggering other devices to do tricks etc."

See? No Problem.

[dave2142]

That is exactly the response I got from Corp Trane as you will. The integrator owns the network and bindings so if nothing works it is their problem. The problem with that is that the contract specifically states that the controls contractor is responsible for all bindings and exposing everything to the integrator for override and adjustment. Which is why I am reluctant to use Rover.

[sysint]

Your contract is contradictory. Either you supervise the bindings OR you don't.
If you have LNS you can all access a DB and you can make the bindings. IF you aren't using LNS and using Tridium API then you cannot make any bindings (that will last).

[NINAX]

I agree with willf650.

Can it still be hosed, yes.

This is where some real (non-contractual) cooperation between the two contractors will go a long way to delivering a successful project to the owner.

If you're very concerned, do a small section and have the other contractor do the magic. At that point you'll either have the warm and fuzzy, or everyone will learn what went wrong, and hopefully correct it.

[NINAX]

... From what I understand Tridium is supposed to work with LNS. That means that you could utilize a LNS software, make changes to the DB and the JACE would know this and vice versa. That puts each of you on equal footing.

Simplicity has it's advantages. Let the better way (Tridium) own it. Leave the half & half for the lady's coffee.

I think if the Tridium people are using their API then it would simply wipe out your binds.

You serious need to get in front of some of these boxes and learn they power, and the joy.

That way that JACE is another device on the network....something tells me they won't want to do that - but it's more open.

So the fewer options with a LNS contractor is more 'open' than the many more Tridium/Tridium OEM contractors? In my area, and math as I know it, 1 is not greater than 8.

[NINAX]

Your contract is contradictory. Either you supervise the bindings OR you don't.

If so, I'm sure there was a clarifying question pre-bid. I can't stand it when contractors 'overlook' the details, then come back crying that they can't do something. You bid it, you won it, now DO IT. Or hire a Tridium contractor that can. That's not directed at you dave, just a general comment.
He can do the bindings, then Tridium can take over.

IF you aren't using LNS and using Tridium API then you cannot make any bindings (that will last).

Please sys, you're starting to embarrass yourself. Most of us know you're smarter than that.

Funny though, you've went all PC on BACcrap, but you haven't given up any of the Tridium hate. Almost looks like it's all been redirected to Tridium. The problem for you will be 'WE' have a good argument.

I understand the scale of sales potential for you.

[dave2142]

I really want to use an LNS database tool like Circon for several reasons. First I am familiar with that style more than Rover. Second I think it will make the integration much easier and make true open system. The only problem is that I still need Rover to work for service. By setting domain in LNS to 11 in hex or 17 for decimal and subsystem to 001 I have been able to build the system and can talk with Circon no problem. But when I go to rover it does not find devices unless you hit service pin and then they do not work again with Circon. There must be a way to get both to work on a system.

[sysint]

Dave - I think what somebody doesn't realize here is you are probably using that older API with Rover. I heard they were moving to LNS but it sounds like not in your case. Anyway, you seem to be aware that devices in a network contain more than simply their Neuron ID. This would be their "street address". Here's what happens in a practical manner- Lets say the Trid guys commission your devices in their network and bind and then you come along. Your Rover package will go out there and reassign everything. If I remember correctly, this is force-done automatically. Now, all your nodes are somewhere else. If I remember Rover likes to default to a different domain than LNS typically starts with. Your Trid guys may not be happy with you after that because they will ask who are you and what have you done to our nodes! However, if you are using LNS based Circon Network Integrator and the Trid guys are using LNS, you are drawing from the same DB so there isn't going to be conflicts with nodes. If you make a bind they see it. If you commission a device they get that, etc...

I have taken old Circon API card access controllers and ran them with LNS and Circon's old API software (so have others) but you have to be aware of how each system works as to indexing assignment of nodes.

Why try to figure that out? Either work on a common platform for this project OR turn over binding responsibility to the Tridium installer and ammend your contract. When it comes done to it the customer wants a clean working system.

I look at it this way-- LNS allows both a hand in the setup and is a coordinated documentation center. If that's the contract that you have to do some binds, then that's what you should do. Otherwise, if you can bail out on binding, let the Trid guys do it. You just won't be able to use your tools on those devices. You will have to sign off on the project and then it's the Tridium contractors responsibility. Personally, I wouldn't let them have it BOTH ways, I'd make them decide up front.

EDIT-- OK Ninax?..... off the sauce...

[sysint]

If so, I'm sure there was a clarifying question pre-bid. I can't stand it when contractors 'overlook' the details, then come back crying that they can't do something. You bid it, you won it, now DO IT. Or hire a Tridium contractor that can. That's not directed at you dave, just a general comment.
He can do the bindings, then Tridium can take over.....

Yea. Those specifying engineers are always completely thought out and never make mistakes....

[scrooloose]

Your Rover package will go out there and reassign everything. If I remember correctly, this is force-done automatically. Now, all your nodes are somewhere else. If I remember Rover likes to default to a different domain than LNS typically starts with.

This is not the case anymore, Rover runs in a passive mode by default and will not write anything. This has been the case for a year or 2 now, since the invent of Rover 5 and we are at Rover 6 now.

Dave - To get rover to see all the units while being setup by another program you need to set one of the DSN to a Zero Length. I usually go in and set DSN(B) to the ZL since most companies only use A. That is the case with JCI at least, not sure about your system though. To do this i use another program like nlutil or something that can write to specific DSN without formating your link. Then from that point forward long as they dont reformat that DSN you can see it all the time. So ya it sucks that you got to set it but hopefully its a one time deal.

[sysint]

...funny though, you've went all PC on BACcrap, but you haven't given up any of the Tridium hate. Almost looks like it's all been redirected to Tridium. The problem for you will be 'WE' have a good argument.
I understand the scale of sales potential for you.

Low. I think you need to review the bacnet plugfest thread. MSTP bacnet will never be the fieldbus that CEA-709 is and I think I made clear the distinction. However, I have always given bacnet credit for AST functionality, although I still state in the CEA-709 world who cares about this because you have ilon's, Tridium JACES, Loytec servers, etc... that can handle these functions any number of ways.

What I don't mince words with is what something is. And Tridium is essentially a proprietary Niagara Framework over "open" protocols, although they seem to do it better than most. That is what it is.

[sysint]

Scrooloose-- Thanks for the information on the software update with Rover.

[qtip]

You can do all your bindings with rover and then have the Jace learn the link but you would probably be better off doing the binding with the Jace in the first place. Sounds like on this project there is a two part deal with you doing the controls and some one else doing the front end. Is that the case? I work for the Devil (Trane franchise office) and I would be reluctant to do any binding on a job such as this with Rover for the simple fact the if something does happen there is no quik way to restore the data base.

I totally agree with this, it should be the responsibility of the integrator for all of the bindings.

As scrooloose stated after the Jace has commissioned the link go jump on the link and reset the DSN B to a ZL domain and you will be able to run Rover as needed. This is very common when doing any type of work like this.

You stated "Rover has the crap scared out of me since it does not even play well with the BCU". Not sure how you come up with this....seems to work fine for me.

Yea. Those specifying engineers are always completely thought out and never make mistakes....

Sounds like this one is a real charm

The other way around this is to do the whole job yourself under one contract, this would probably be better for the customer in the long run.

[freddy-b]

What I don't mince words with is what something is. And Tridium is essentially a proprietary Niagara Framework over "open" protocols, although they seem to do it better than most. That is what it is.

The way I see it..You are technically correct with this statement. But as you put it in other threads that "Legacy systems are finite" and Tridium is a "thumb in the damn solution" or something to that effect. Right now with integrations this makes sense to most owners who fit in that umbrella. By the time this legacy equipment is totally vanished...chances are we will be well beyond the current "Pure" solutions, and on to the next and best greatest thing...whatever that may be...

[dave2142]

Not sure if everyone understands what I am saying. Forget all the contract crap that is the reason for all these problems in the first place. We can argue contracts all day long but when the equipment does not work the owner could care less who is to blame. All I want is for this to go as smooth as possible for all. This project is one of a large school system where the integrator is flat spec and all the schools are out to low bid for (OPEN PROTOCOL LON). Some have JCI some Trane and some Honeywell. The contract call for the school contract to own the bindings and the integrator the front end so to speak. I know of several other contractors who spent months arguing over this binding concept because once the integrator connected up it blew them all out and equipment stopped working. The integration is done at end of project. Their is no commissioning agent so I can argue all I want that the equipment worked before integration but the proof is in the pudding so to speak. Not to mention I have only been given 24 hours of time to work with integrator. So can someone tell me with experience if I should use Rover or another options so I just give the integrator and xml or pdf with bindings and when he goes online everything I had working still works.

[dave2142]

This is my big ***** open should mean open. I mean isn't that what the customer wants.

[dave2142]

Originally Posted by willf650 View Post
You can do all your bindings with rover and then have the Jace learn the link but you would probably be better off doing the binding with the Jace in the first place. Sounds like on this project there is a two part deal with you doing the controls and some one else doing the front end. Is that the case? I work for the Devil (Trane franchise office) and I would be reluctant to do any binding on a job such as this with Rover for the simple fact the if something does happen there is no quik way to restore the data base.

The bindings are part of the controls so I need them to test and complete my controls.

[scrooloose]

What he is saying is that Rover does not save a database where you can backup or restore bindings. So if you make 1000 bindings and the integrator goes and blows them out you are making those 1000 by hand over again.

So if it is the contractors responsibility to make them then they will be done with rover, but that will be the downfall if the integrator wipes them.

Am i understanding the question correctly?