Integrated / Intelligent buildings 2

[WBA]

I'm about to embark on a project which will involve integrating all building services back to a centralised system.
Services to be integrated will be lifts, fire detection systems, HVAC, lighting controls, building security (CCTV, door access etc)and power distribution.
Is there anybody who has tackled similar projects who can offer advice around best systems to use, problems / pitfalls encountered.
Thanks

 

[walkes]

Talk to your local Johnson Controls or Honeywell representative. Both companies have products to implement what you require. I am currently working with Johnson Controls on a similar project to tie the security, card access, lighting, hvac, etc into their MetaSys DDC system.

 

[remp]

Sounds like you need a BMS system.

Firstly you need to schedule every piece of equipment in the entire building, fans, AHU, pumps, lighting DB, lifts, switchboards, doors etc... Then you have to schedule all the points you need to control in all the items of equipment. Need to determine if analogue, digital etc....
Be careful putting the Fire detection system on the BMS. depending on local codes this may hve to be a stand alone system, however monitoring ONLY would probably be allowed.

When you have your points list ready or even just equipment list talk to some BMS specialists... Honeywell, Seimens, Trane, etc....Im sure would love to hear from you.

 

[jherbert]

a few thoughts:

- fire and security must be independant, as billq mentioned above, systems could be monitored;

- don't choose one single manufacturer, choose one protocol ie bacnet or equal. Otherwise, the owner will get screwed later and curse you for life

- If you have existing plant, chillers, lift panels, etc. check protocols. Manufacturers charge a kings fortune to change ordered interfaces;

- insist upon vendor proven (demonstrated) compliance with your choosen protocol;

- chose a simple web-enabled front-end, so you can troubleshoot from anywhere in the building or any other location.

- there are increasing more and more intranet enabled devices, that run over LAN with PnP configuration. Also CAT 5 LAN cable is cheap as chips nowadays;

- USA mil/navy have OTT spec. and documents (free online) so you check your documentation, and dot all the i's and cross t's beforehand.

- specify completely separate trunking/conduits for system wiring, ignore claims that there is no chance of interference, and still ensure cabling is properly screened.

- ensure vendors distribute your specified spare points, and point types over entire building. Spare points are cheap at tender stage, and very very, expensive later. Spec. minimum two spare, of each type, at every outstation.

my 2 cents

cheers,

 

[jherbert]

and one more .....

there are no intelligent buildings,
just smart engineers

 

[lilliput1]

The fire system should be stand alone for the following reasons: to be sure only authorized person gets access tyo it; so it would be complete before occupancy and not get held up by other functions if it were integrated; so it would be on emergency power; so fire protection equipment manufacturers can provide it; control manufacturers typically overstate their integration capability when they are selling their service, later on they back off their capability and blame others.

 

[remp]

WBA,

To save on wiring and installation you should consider looking at having a high level interace to certain equipment like Chillers and variable speed drives. say you want to pick up 4-5 points from each it may be just as easy to specify high level interface cards in these devices and run a single LAN cable to each unit in a daisy chain fashion.

Ensure the HL interace is compatable with the BMS you have specified. e.g. if it is a LON BMS, specify LON cards. If it is BACnet BMS specify BACnet cards, and Modbus..etc..

Be carful with the HL interface from the Siemens VSDs. It doesnt work. Had a major disaster recently where about 40 drives which had to be replaced due to the HL interface cards mal-function.

The high level interface card allows you to read all the available infromation form the Chiller or VSD without needing a pair of cables for each point. Other equipment can be hooked up in this fashion, e.g. computer room a/c units, lighting controllers, fire indicator panels.

Remember though this should only be done if you feel it would be of benefit to your appliation. Dont specify them only for the sake of it. HL interfaces can also slow down the system network so talk to your BMS provider regarding speeds etc...

 

[enfuego26]

In some instances (specifically UUKL 864) it is integral that the fire alarm interfaces the Building Automation system. UUKL 864 refers to smoke evac. ie. 90%+ of all fire related deaths are smoke inhaulation.

UUKL 864 is a label that a Building Automation System (BAS) has passed testing for the smoke control requirements. Similar to UL listing for electrical devices.

When fire system senses the smoke, the HVAC system accordingly goes into a smoke control mode....create negative space static where the smoke was sensed, positive space static elsewhere. Whole design is intended to isolate the area where smoke was sensed and keep it from spreading.

Otherwise - generally speaking the integration of card access is easy - most all automation companies can do that - Invensys, Honeywell etc. Same for lighting control.

 

[remp]

Can somebody please tell me what UUKL 864 is?

Where I come from (Australia) smoke control and BMS are kept seperate. The smoke control controllers which are driven by the fire indicator panel over ride the BMS during fire mode. The BMS does not control plant during fire operation. However I have interfaced the Fire indicator panle to the BMS for monitoring purposes only..

..interesting, Im sure though if the BMS can pass a fire/smoke test it could be left control air handling plant during fire...is this what UUKL 864 defines??

 

[jherbert]

Hi,

Personally, I prefer the old way, leave
the AFA system as a standalone entity,
certified by the relevant bodies (in
your case aussie standards), allowing
the BMS to monitor the status.

There is a very good reason why BMS
outstations must operate with the network
- reliability is a real issue.

The loss of some historical temp. data
is hardly worth worrying about in the
scheme of things. However, a failed AFA
detector event could cause loss of life,
property, production, income, etc, etc.

If the relevant bodies (LPC,FM,etc.) will
certify the BMS I see no problem.

cheers,

 

[AndyBoyce]

I recently undertook a similar project in the Republic of Ireland, installing a system to integrate BMS, security, card access, cctv, power consumption and to a degree fire detection.

The whole system was installed on a flood wired cat 6 network, with the exception of the fire detection which due to local regulations had to be installed using more traditional cabling.

The system we used eventually was Honeywell EBI although both Andover and Johnson controls both offered a similar product.

Particular problems encountered were with integration of CCTV equipment (Digital) through fibre links to the network. The CCTV element of EBI was at the time (2000) problematic. All problems were eventually solved but it took a while. This may well not be the case now.

One tip if using a network in a project like this, make sure adequate protection is in place to protect your system from the rest of the network, which the client may be using for data/voice applications. We suffered with a virus attacking the server which set the project back.