Controls In General

[skwsproul]

Back to skwsproul's post in response to Dowadudda - "how often do you guys run into a situation where one can not get the two different devices integrated?"
In this case, a programmable controller has to take care of the logic for commanding the hw VAVs to the desired mode. The Trane unit won't do it, so in this case most likely an XL50 or 500 would be in place at the middle to achieve the translation.

Yep that would be one way to integrate. Though a jace would be better as someone else already stated.

A way to think of that for those learning here about integrating 2 different types or brands of controllers.
Its kinda like a Mac talking to a PC via an internet connection, the browser (or the plugins attached to the browser ie Java) becomes the interpreter between the 2. Probably not the best analogy but it should help

[digo]

HA HA HA HA!!! You thought you had me!!! (Thanks DIGO) Just a little over 80 companies.

To be fair, the question was: Does any other bacnet manufacturer use ARCNET other than ALC?

of the 82 listed, if you narrow it down to Building Automation/hvac controls, the list gets shorter:
andover
automated logic
cimetrics
johnson controls
teletrol systems
Trane

however, if you look at the list from the wayback archive(1997), it is almost the same - except automated logic was not listed then - late adopter?
http://web.archive.org/web/199706090...om/example.htm

[sysint]

Even those left is simply a formality because tell me who is integrating bacnet multi-vendor across ARCNET? However, I can understand why ALC wants to use it. It is deterministic. So, when you have Mr. unreliable MSTP by comparison I can see why you want the ARCNET... if you aren't using a a more modern and robust field bus.

[control$]

Isn't Bacnet MS/TP 76.8 the most common format? Sysint?

[sysint]

I think maybe bacnet/IP is most common now. Do you really achieve 76.8 or is this simply a max setting?

History: My question was specific to the ALC lineup and why they use ARCNET. Xarulu wanted to suggest that LON had a single chip maker (Echelon) FALSE and wanted to suggest this was more proprietary than his ALC lineup, which is why I brought up ARCNET because even the bacnet guys complain about this... (see previous)

Anyway, I understand why ALC would want to use it over MSTP. It would be more reliable.

[yroy]

My thing is SYSINT, you are right about ALC with LON behind in the times. They are now in beta with a LON portal that is supposed to be better than the SLTA-10 rig.

Is this the same one that they were working on back in april 2002? If so, after 6 years, I am sure that they had ample time to take all the bugs out. It should be reliable and fast.