Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 79 to 91 of 109
  1. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    364
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by orion242 View Post
    The only way your going to see anything close to your numbers...

    1. Idle network where PFM/Tokens are the only thing passing. Shocker.
    2. Worst possible case, MIF = 1, no WPM/RPM support, as many gaps in addresses as possible and boolean point polling.

    It would be extremely rare to see this in even a default configuration. Devices with MIF = 1 are only the absolute bottom of the barrel junk. Vary rare from what I see and usually garbage devices. Same garbage that wouldn't support WPM/RPM which are fairly common otherwise.

    MIF of 10-20 which seems to be common in even commodity stuff, means your math is off by a factor of 10-20.

    As the traffic increases, tokens/PFM will be lower % of traffic just because they are some of the smallest packets.



    Maybe in the special olympics of bacnet devices.



    More than willing if you want to swap links to capture files here.
    Your issues are with CHIPKIN. That's where the information is from. Take it up with them.

  2. #80
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    364
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by s2sam View Post
    Good day BetterDuck,....
    Personally, I think you spend way too much time reading your marketing materials and less time actually understanding the technology itself. If you did the latter you will see that not every technology/device/product is suitable for every application. I would suggest you actually try and design products like these first before spouting off various technical tidbits you acquired along the way. Perhaps then we can have a meaningful discussion.

    Cheers,

    Sam
    Sam, first if you can identify marketing information from the company I'm with, let me know it. I'd actually like to have some. So would the customers.

    Tell me you aren't thinking about jamming IPv6 into BACnet MSTP.

    And, of course when you can't or don't do something, it only means it isn't necessary. This is why the mobile phones never progressed from analog to digital and then into smart phones... oh, wait... that actually did happen. The same thing happened in the welding industry when people started experimenting with various gasses. And, believe it or not even with laser cutting machinery people moved to fiber optics significantly reducing the power requirements and gas requirements. It's amazing the way modern technology takes over in all industries.

    Here's what I see in a practical environment: It's not practical to use fieldbus in the manner you are pushing it anymore. You ignored completely what I stated on IP controllers and cost. Of course you need ignore it because it negates most everything you do currently. I understand that. I'm not questioning your intelligence in any way on that, but I think the industry is starting to crack and there is going to be modernization coming because of increased functionality and better costs.

    I'd like to find the 1996 article by Carrier guys entitled something like Interoperability and the Internet. These guys didn't know what, just that it would be something. I complained at the time similar to you with things about that article and I should have looked at it differently. It's really something.

  3. #81
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Edmonton, AB Canada
    Posts
    803
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BetterDuck View Post
    Sam, first if you can identify marketing information from the company I'm with, let me know it. I'd actually like to have some. So would the customers.

    Tell me you aren't thinking about jamming IPv6 into BACnet MSTP.

    And, of course when you can't or don't do something, it only means it isn't necessary. This is why the mobile phones never progressed from analog to digital and then into smart phones... oh, wait... that actually did happen. The same thing happened in the welding industry when people started experimenting with various gasses. And, believe it or not even with laser cutting machinery people moved to fiber optics significantly reducing the power requirements and gas requirements. It's amazing the way modern technology takes over in all industries.

    Here's what I see in a practical environment: It's not practical to use fieldbus in the manner you are pushing it anymore. You ignored completely what I stated on IP controllers and cost. Of course you need ignore it because it negates most everything you do currently. I understand that. I'm not questioning your intelligence in any way on that, but I think the industry is starting to crack and there is going to be modernization coming because of increased functionality and better costs.

    I'd like to find the 1996 article by Carrier guys entitled something like Interoperability and the Internet. These guys didn't know what, just that it would be something. I complained at the time similar to you with things about that article and I should have looked at it differently. It's really something.
    Good day BetterDuck,

    Sam, first if you can identify marketing information from the company I'm with, let me know it. I'd actually like to have some. So would the customers.
    My apologies. I was just trying to figure out where you acquired your all knowing technical knowledge. Given your responses and also not answering direct questions it is quite clear that you have never designed with any of the technologies that you spout off like-an-expert routinely.

    Tell me you aren't thinking about jamming IPv6 into BACnet MSTP.
    As mentioned in my last sentence... you seem to not want to answer direct technical questions and instead you tend to try diversion tactics. As you recall I asked for specific reasons why made the comment:

    Security and encryption on RS485 is a ridiculous thing to consider.
    Instead of answering this you try and divert the discussion to:

    Tell me you aren't thinking about jamming IPv6 into BACnet MSTP.

    And, of course when you can't or don't do something, it only means it isn't necessary. This is why the mobile phones never progressed from analog to digital and then into smart phones... oh, wait... that actually did happen. The same thing happened in the welding industry when people started experimenting with various gasses. And, believe it or not even with laser cutting machinery people moved to fiber optics significantly reducing the power requirements and gas requirements. It's amazing the way modern technology takes over in all industries.
    This is not an answer to my question. If you made a mistake or you simply do not know then say so... or is your ego too large to admit that it was a nonsensical comment.


    Here's what I see in a practical environment: It's not practical to use fieldbus in the manner you are pushing it anymore.
    Firstly, I am not pushing anything or technology anywhere... so please do not judge me by your own intentions/behavior. If you think that I am pushing any technology, etc then please show me my posts. I simply respond to technology comments that are false and/or misleading... and I make these comments based upon my actual experience designing and manufacturing products that use these technologies. Hence I am quite comfortable to go toe to toe to anyone that wishes to have a meaningful technical discussion on the merits and limitations on any of these technologies.

    You ignored completely what I stated on IP controllers and cost.
    You misinterpret my desire to not respond as an acceptance of your comments. I chose not to respond, as it is impossible to have a meaningful discussion with you, as you are combative, argumentative, and simply refuse to answer direct questions posed to you.

    Of course you need ignore it because it negates most everything you do currently. I understand that.

    You sir are out of line. Please do not make comments on myself and my business, as clearly you do not know what I do, what markets I serve, or what customers I have.

    I'm not questioning your intelligence in any way on that, but I think... <snip>
    Why not? I do it all the time... in fact I am doing it now as I am writing this response to you, as clearly it is hopeless to have a meaningful conversation with you on anything technical that conflicts in what you believe.

    Cheers,

    Sam

  4. #82
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    364
    Post Likes
    I don't make a claim to have all the answers. This is what you specialize and trying to say about me Sam. To the point I get the impression you have a vested interest not to want to see too much discussion against BACnet MSTP devices. You can like them all you want. Regarding the RS485 comment, as I've told you and I will write it again. I am referring to BACnet MSTP. You can continue to reframe this if you like, complain, discredit, but when you read the paragraph I think its apparent.

    Are you trying to jam IPv6 into fieldbus for security and encryption?
    Do you design or manufacturer IP controllers with I/O for use in buildings?
    Do you disagree with the points I wrote regarding the IP controllers in buildings and cost competitiveness?

    I now ask those questions rhetorically for others to consider. I will not respond to you further.

  5. #83
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Edmonton, AB Canada
    Posts
    803
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BetterDuck View Post
    I don't make a claim to have all the answers. This is what you specialize and trying to say about me Sam. To the point I get the impression you have a vested interest not to want to see too much discussion against BACnet MSTP devices. You can like them all you want. Regarding the RS485 comment, as I've told you and I will write it again. I am referring to BACnet MSTP. You can continue to reframe this if you like, complain, discredit, but when you read the paragraph I think its apparent.

    Are you trying to jam IPv6 into fieldbus for security and encryption?
    Do you design or manufacturer IP controllers with I/O for use in buildings?
    Do you disagree with the points I wrote regarding the IP controllers in buildings and cost competitiveness?

    I now ask those questions rhetorically for others to consider. I will not respond to you further.
    Good day BetterDuck,

    I don't make a claim to have all the answers.
    Who does? But your comments come off that you do and if someone challenges you and/or has a differing view you sidestep their rebuttal.

    In my case I have a lot yet to learn, but I have learnt a few things along the way and so if I see incorrect statement or one that is slanted to give a false impression I post accordingly.

    To the point I get the impression you have a vested interest not to want to see too much discussion against BACnet MSTP devices.
    I simply do not know where you get this from? The only thing I can think of is when comments are made against RS485, etc and I speak up in defense of RS485. I do this because a number of RS485 comments are false and/or are made without truly understanding how RS485 works. Please do not interpret my responses to mean that I believe that RS485 is the best technology for all applications. No technology is.

    In my case I am indifferent as to what technology people wish to use... Bacnet or otherwise. My designs are technology agnostic and I design with whatever technology is best suited for the customer and their application. Because of this I am exposed to a lot of different and competing technologies... and so I have a more pragmatic approach to the overall design. Just a heads up, but I am not only involved in HVAC and so HVAC related protocols do not rule my business.

    As for holding you to your RS485 comment... My point is that you bad mouth RS485 routinely with a broad brush. When pressed for technical details why you hold this position you simply divert the conversation and/or refuse to respond. RS485 is not the end all be all technology. It is an old technology, but surprisingly works very well when designed properly. As with any technology there are trade offs and so one has to assess the good and bad to determine if it should be used.

    Regarding the RS485 comment, as I've told you and I will write it again. I am referring to BACnet MSTP. You can continue to reframe this if you like, complain, discredit, but when you read the paragraph I think its apparent.
    Security and encryption on RS485 is a ridiculous thing to consider.
    I know I can and at times be dense, so please be specific as to what about RS485 is ridiculous about security and encryption. It is simple question, so please respond without side stepping and/or another diversion.

    As for your other questions...

    Are you trying to jam IPv6 into fieldbus for security and encryption?
    Nope... I am simply trying to get you to provide technical reasons why encryption cannot be used with RS485.

    Do you design or manufacturer IP controllers with I/O for use in buildings?
    Yup... but every controller includes a field bus(es) of sort. In some cases I use a multiprocessor approach in order to ensure that the final device meets the system's hard real time requirements that cannot be met with a dedicated Ethernet/IP based device. There are times where IP is the right choice...there are other times where a field bus is the right choice.... and then there are times where both are needed on the same design.

    Do you disagree with the points I wrote regarding the IP controllers in buildings and cost competitiveness?
    In some applications the items you mention are desirable and in other cases they are not needed or wanted. I cannot broadly generalize like you do:

    an entire system of ethernet based controllers is less expensive than the fieldbus designs. Much less actually.
    simply because there are too many variables at play here (customer, budget, new/existing site, project objectives/goals, future needs, etc) and some of these variables go beyond technical elements. In some projects it may be cheaper to go IP all the way, but in others perhaps not... I can say that in most cases a blended approach is the best balance and works really well, as then the project can benefit from each of the technologies best features.

    Cheers,

    Sam

  6. #84
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,571
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by BetterDuck View Post
    Your issues are with CHIPKIN. That's where the information is from. Take it up with them.
    You seem to be the one posting their garbage. I will take it up with them as it seems the snakes are using this as a sale tool. As often as you point out your devices have WS capture built-in, I would thought you looked at capture file or two.

    Quote Originally Posted by BetterDuck View Post
    I'm aware of many things on MSTP.
    Your comments point otherwise.


    The only thing your comments have me considering, is why I would ever look at a Loytec product when the "technical" points are:

    1. Think everyone with an IP controller is copying them, though there many options existed long before
    2. Tokens/PFM take up the bulk of the bandwidth on MSTP
    3. Devices do not need protocols to communicate
    4. RS485 security is impossible or needs IPv6 to make that happen.


    Leaves me wondering if a call to support isn't going to end up with me teaching the "support" team and a complete waste of time.

    Isn't this called "fake news" these days??
    Last edited by orion242; 02-16-2019 at 09:51 PM.
    Propagating the formula. http://www.noagendashow.com/

  7. #85
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,571
    Post Likes
    And from another thread on Loytec and pricing...

    Quote Originally Posted by joey791 View Post
    We did a job awhile back and thought about using a LGate, it was more expensive than a Jace with everything to do the job. Pricing varies though.
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxBurn View Post
    I checked my sources and I see no price advantage with Loytec LGATE-900 / LT-13 vs the Jace8 solution I'm proposing, and that's assuming I can get a decent multiplier vs the public prices posted which are over DOUBLE the Jace8 & 2 LON cards solution. I've also got eight techs here certified to work on Tridium and zero that's have seen Loytec before. Why would I do this again?
    Checking my sources, I would agree with the above. Loytec has nothing compelling that I'm going to hassle with the technical ignorance with similar priced options that actually have their crap together and good support.
    Last edited by orion242; 02-16-2019 at 11:30 PM.
    Propagating the formula. http://www.noagendashow.com/

  8. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    304
    Post Likes

    IT vs OT

    My colleagues and I have had a several discussions with the IT staff (military, "G6 folks") on the topic of "Control Manuf. Comparison". The IT staff is slowly warming up to the fact that they need to interfacing with the building HVAC controllers (and smart meters). The talks quickly turned to protocols and how are you going to get that XYZ protocol converted to an IP network (and other esoteric IT discussions on VRF-Virtual Routing & Forwarding).

    For ease of explanation our network architecture grouped the tech gear' into "IT-Side" and "OT-Side". OT is 'Operational Technology'. See attached PDF.

    I'm sure there's many stories about the IT guys not knowing much about DDC controllers or even HVAC (and do they care). My colleague and I started to come up with some jokes to ease the tension. What the difference between IT and OT? "In IT nothing rusts". "The IT world is carpeted". Another way to look at it, OT is the control and monitoring of MEP Systems - Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing. What's funny, an IT guy said, "MEP!, we've never hear of that?" And you guys got a world of alphabet soup we've got to know!

    I've enjoy this post and how the discussion turn to Unitary Controllers. Another name is ASC (Application Specific Controller). Soup Time. When the IT staff looked at the Lon Works OSI layer, they thought that was the best technology. We had to explain to them that the 'defacto' standard is MS/TP BACnet. Interesting that there was no discussion on LON - that pretty much tells the story. BACnet is ok, but LON is better, IMHO.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  9. #87
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Kenilworth NJ
    Posts
    1,379
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by amigo View Post
    yes, certainly the
    To help un-hijack the thread -

    I think you should put in Pneumatics

    PRO
    *Labor intensive to service - $$
    *Constantly needs calibration - $$
    *Completely opaque to other controls contractors - as they are likely either not old enough to know ehat the @#%@% that all is or they were not from a mechanical background that would have taught them how to work with it
    *Nuclear Holocaust - proof controls, assuming they are not melted by the heat or knocked over by the shockwave
    *MANY MANY more proven installations than all the DDC put together - although many have been ripped out

    CON
    *The customer may not like it
    *Completely opaque to the customer
    *In the event of a Nuclear Holocaust, there may not be an end user around to enjoy their intact controls system

    And maybe it is time to give a little hug and remember we will be posting wall of shame photos long after the dust clears on this thread. It was rather informative for a while there. Still is in some spots. We are all professionals and do good work.
    Hmmmm....smells like numbatwo to me.

  10. #88
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,243
    Post Likes
    Quote Originally Posted by numbawunfela View Post
    To help un-hijack the thread -

    I think you should put in Pneumatics

    PRO
    *Labor intensive to service - $$
    *Constantly needs calibration - $$
    *Completely opaque to other controls contractors - as they are likely either not old enough to know ehat the @#%@% that all is or they were not from a mechanical background that would have taught them how to work with it
    *Nuclear Holocaust - proof controls, assuming they are not melted by the heat or knocked over by the shockwave
    *MANY MANY more proven installations than all the DDC put together - although many have been ripped out

    CON
    *The customer may not like it
    *Completely opaque to the customer
    *In the event of a Nuclear Holocaust, there may not be an end user around to enjoy their intact controls system

    And maybe it is time to give a little hug and remember we will be posting wall of shame photos long after the dust clears on this thread. It was rather informative for a while there. Still is in some spots. We are all professionals and do good work.
    as of 15 years ago pneumatics were still going in in LA
    Keep it simple to keep it cool!

  11. #89
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Kenilworth NJ
    Posts
    1,379
    Post Likes
    I am of the firm opinion that old and weird keeps me paid more than the average bear. So woohoohooo on new pneumatic installs!

    In a thread that died in the htalk server crash I asked about diagnostic Bacnet routers. I had recently been burned by KMCs overwhelming glitchiness and wanted an alternative to their router. Unfortunately (for my newfound KMC predjudice) KMC had the best diagnostics I could find. A nice Htalker from Australia suggested the LIP-ME201C from Loytec. I LUV LUV LUV it! It beats the pants off the KMC router in my opinion.

    It has a Super neeto chart that shows all MACs on the wire that constantly updates passively. No discovery required. A nifty set of metrics that updates every 10 seconds so you can see how your changes are affecting things. And best of all I am free to hate KMC without the hypocrisy of having to use their router. And the price was within $20 of each other.

    I know literally NOTHING else about Loytec but I really like their router.
    Hmmmm....smells like numbatwo to me.

  12. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,571
    Post Likes
    http://www.hvacrcontrol.com/bacnet-router/

    $99, has two mstp port and does everything you describe also.
    Propagating the formula. http://www.noagendashow.com/

  13. #91
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,243
    Post Likes
    that looks like a great deal w the 2 mstp trunks, how did the testing go?
    Keep it simple to keep it cool!

Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •