TAC Info

**joey791** · 06-27-2005, 06:07 PM

Im going look at a job tommorrow that we are taking over, the installing contractor refuses to give any info whatsoever, does anyone have a default password for a TAC system, any help would be greatly appreciated.

**digital freq** · 06-27-2005, 07:28 PM

Yeah, PM me or leave an email address. I'll send em to ya.
I think it might go against the rules to post em here.

**joey791** · 06-27-2005, 07:53 PM

digital, I shot boss an email to release my email to you

I really appreciate the help

**sysint** · 06-27-2005, 08:30 PM

Use discover and upload the database.

**joey791** · 06-27-2005, 08:54 PM

Sys havent been to the job yet, there is a chance there is no computer onsite, but only a keypad interface, wont be sure until tommorrow

**jimmyj** · 06-27-2005, 09:40 PM

"Discover" and prey! alot!

**sysint** · 06-28-2005, 05:26 AM

.... at least you can do it.

**jimmyj** · 06-28-2005, 06:22 PM

If it were BACnet the lack of an LNS DB would not be an issue. This is the main flaw with an LNS system, it is database reliant. Where BACnet uses no such DB. No you cant re-configure the BACnet devices of manufacture-X unless you have their tool BUT if you "DISCOVER" an LNS DB even echelon states this is not a flawless operation with the potential to break bindings. So when your done and you think you are god and launch your plug-in, you better pray! Did we not just talk about how TAC uses some sort of AUTO-BIND funtion that you stated does NOT show up in LNS? What do you think would happen with these and devices like this if you did the DISCOVER and then recomissioned?

**joey791** · 06-28-2005, 06:30 PM

Only keypad on site, we were able to guess the password on it and get in, thanks for all the help

**sysint** · 06-28-2005, 07:54 PM

Jimmy - some interesting points.

However, is the potential problem with the TAC devices the fault of LNS or wouldn't you agree it's more the fault of the TAC implementation?

And, on the possibility of the bindings being lost, really, how hard would it be to figure it all out when you have all the devices and the variables?

About the plugins, are you saying you won't be able to realize a binding or not?

A deployed LNS system is not database reliant. You can pull the database and walk away. You also don't need any GC's or BCU's with databases. BACnet by contrast is dependant on not only multiple databases and setup software(s), but also the associated hardware as "binding" isn't really possible directly device to device. There is even questions as to whether multiple manufacturers devices can reside on the same wire.

**jimmyj** · 06-29-2005, 01:24 PM

No the lon system does not need it to operate BUT the LNS front end sure does. And as for the plug-in launching the plug-in aside even after you do the Discovery I assume LNS requires you to do a recomission of the network, so once this step is done the only bindings left are the ones LM "DISCOVERED" Where does a BACnet system use a DB? It is a read, write, master, slave service based system. All devices have a unique device number and on any one individual segment a node number.

**sysint** · 06-29-2005, 03:24 PM

Originally posted by jimmyj
No the lon system does not need it to operate BUT the LNS front end sure does.

Entirely incorrect. See information on the ilon100.

Where does a BACnet system use a DB? It is a read, write, master, slave service based system. All devices have a unique device number and on any one individual segment a node number.

Each individual subsystem has a database setup tool. Many GC's have a database. Are you saying your BCU doesn't? Hence some of the problems with BACnet on the address restrictions and having multiple vendors on the same wire. Are you saying that that LON method of addressing is inferior?

Then you probably don't like MAC addressing either.

LNS allows for site database creation that can be passed to other applications that everything about the particular site with multiple vendors products.

No other control system has that ability.

**jimmyj** · 06-29-2005, 05:17 PM

Well you are correct the iLon100 or 1000 has no DB BUT to configure it you sure need an LNS based tool and for an LNS based tool you need a LNS DB!
As for a BACnet global controler I would not call it a DB as I would call it the controlers application. Does not a Lon router have a routing table? Are we to call that a DB?

As for the addressing scheme of Lon, I think its great, the fact that you dont have to set a dip swith or rotory sw for node address is great, logical routing of packets ect. however I would like to see a one time Echelon added royalty fee to the initial cost of the neuron chip to do away with this whole credit business.

Thread: TAC Info

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Posting Permissions