June 2008 |
[an error occurred while processing this directive] |
Campus Automation Presents Unique Challenges Multiple interfaces makes campus-wide optimization, data mining, and energy and operational analysis difficult, |
Paul Ehrlich & Ira Goldschmidt |
Building automation systems provide more than an academic challenge on college and other multi-building campuses. Some of these challenges include:
How many contractors/manufacturers are appropriate?
With more than one manufacturer how is interoperability handled?
Who installs/manages inter-building communications?
What level of design standardization is needed?
There are other issues such as getting the right user interface and tools to optimize campus operations, how do we support all this stuff?, and dealing with “legacy” systems.
[an error occurred while processing this directive] |
How Many Suppliers/Manufacturers?
Our first answer to this question is “one is too many and two is not
enough”. Seriously, there is no easy or correct answer to this question (and
arguably the real question is how do we get the best service and pricing?). In
an ideal world one contractor/manufacturer would be the best approach given the
issues of training, standardization and ease of maintenance. However, purchasing
rules may require that multiple contractors bid on each project, and the sheer
volume of work may require the services of multiple contractors anyway.
Therefore multiple BAS contractors and manufacturers are generally a given in a
campus environment. There are alternatives to this free-for-all including a
master agreement with a single manufacturer, using a manufacturer that allows
multiple contractor representation within the region, or the use of open
protocols and a unified user interface. Nevertheless, the challenge is in
achieving BAS installation and operator-interface consistency so that facility
operations can be optimized.
Interoperability Between Multiple Manufacturers
Due to the above, many campuses find themselves with an installation
composed of multiple systems. Fortunately, each building on a campus often has a
single manufacturer’s system, so this challenge may be simplified to the choice
between a single vs. multiple central operator interfaces. However, multiple
interfaces makes campus-wide optimization, data mining, and energy and
operational analysis difficult, which is less than ideal. Therefore, a unified
operator interface using open protocols becomes an approach worth investigating.
However, the state of interoperability has not yet matured sufficiently to make
this a trivial solution. Nevertheless, a properly applied open protocol solution
with a uniform interface for operations, reporting and analysis makes this worth
pursuing.
Inter-Building Communications
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Ethernet/IP communications has become the standard for upper-level BAS
communications. The campus-wide (WAN) communications needs of a BAS can be
simplified and less-costly if the campus IT infrastructure is used. However,
this usually requires inter-departmental coordination/approvals on areas such as
communications security, maintenance, and system adds/moves/changes. One
alternative approach is for the BAS WAN fiber to be installed/maintained by the
IT department, but dedicated for use by the BAS. There are also more subtle
issues regarding the BAS WAN that become more obvious when an open protocol such
as BACnet® is utilized – these include the proper management of network
segments, broadcasts, and device/object naming and numbering. These issues
clearly require a campus wide-set of standards.…
Design Standards
Undoubtedly some level of design standardization is important for a campus
BAS. However, these standards usually involve a balancing act concerning such
issues as:
When does a standard intrude on the engineer-of-record’s design responsibilities?
Can the standards be used verbatim in the engineer-of-record’s design?
Should it cover standard sequences of operation and points?
Keeping standards up-to-date without making it a full-time job.
The Above Items Are Tactical – What About the
Strategy?
We’ve said it before - “We don’t plan to fail, but often fail to plan.” The
decisions made about the above items should not be made in a vacuum, but instead
should be the tactical implementation of a master-planned strategy. This becomes
increasingly obvious when a campus BAS is often a unique combination of digital
and pneumatics, obsolete (“legacy”) and newer BAS’s, open and proprietary
communications, Ethernet/IP and not…, none of which can be
replaced/upgraded/integrated/etc. all at one time.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[Click Banner To Learn More]
[Home Page] [The Automator] [About] [Subscribe ] [Contact Us]