Honeywell Building Solutions

Transcription

1 Honeywell Building Solutions Open Systems White Paper September 2013

2 Contents Introduction... page 1 What is an Open Protocol?... page 2 Single-Vendor versus Multi-Vendor Protocol... page 3 User-Managed versus Closed Systems... page 4 Choosing the right partner for your... page 4 Building Management System What Does Honeywell Building Solutions Offer?... page 5 Open Systems White Paper September

3 Open Systems: working with the fact, not the fi ction By Deborah Learoyd and Simon Redvers Incorrect assumptions about open systems prevent organisations selecting the right building management solution for their specifi c needs. Introduction These days, when building owners, facility managers or consultants want to specify a new Building Management System (BMS), they invariably say they want an open system. This comes from a fear of becoming locked into a single service provider with the perceived risk (although not always the reality) that this may result in high service prices and poor service levels. It s not always clear what is meant by the term open, and some people use the description open protocol which describes the technical interoperability of the system when really they are looking for service flexibility. This paper explores the pros and cons of three potentially overlapping system types: Open-Protocol Where the BMS head-end can communicate with field controllers using openly-available, industry-standard protocols, which allow users to select system components from a wide range of suppliers. Multi-Vendor Where the system developer/manufacturer certifies selected vendors as System Integrators (SI s) for their products, who are then able to supply, commission and service the system using specially licensed software tools giving building managers a choice of suppliers. These concepts are largely independent. It is possible to have an open-protocol system which may or may not be multi-vendor, or it is possible to have a user-managed system which may or may not support open protocols. For building owners, operators and consultants, a clear understanding of the difference in these concepts and how this affects the success of the system and the facility, is crucial to choosing the right solution. This document clarifies the realities associated with the open concept and sets the context within which building operators and users should select the system that provides them with the most benefits, most cost-effectively, across its lifetime. User-Managed Where the system contains the software tools such that, with appropriate training, a licensed end user or their nominated service providers can service and maintain the system. Open Systems White Paper September

4 What is an Open Protocol? A Building Management System generally is made up of the following parts: a.) Field Controllers, which are hardware devices installed across a site and used to sense and control equipment or building areas e.g. thermostats, room controllers etc, and a b.) Software Head-End, that consolidates and presents all data from the field devices to the system operator for them to view and change the operation of the system and building. A communications protocol is the set of rules that devices use to communicate over a network and an open protocol is an industry standard for communication which enables the software head-end of one manufacturer to communicate with field controllers of any manufacturer that supports the same standard. This provides the building manager with freedom of choice in selecting and matching the software systems and field devices, which create the total building management system. Open protocols have been a good thing for building managers and the supply industry, but there are limitations. Because all devices have to look the same to the software head-end any unique, often advanced, features may not be supported by the protocol, which reduces system functionality to the lowest common denominator. Some manufacturers therefore support both open protocols and proprietary or extended protocols for field devices, allowing building managers to access additional functionality not supported by the base standard. Also, the open systems protocols normally apply only to the real-time day-to-day running of the systems. Set-up, programming and commissioning of devices is usually still done with manufacturer-specific tools. This means that the promise of infinite choice is impractical as facility managers often don t want the hassle of multiple different configuration systems to maintain. Open Protocol Systems Advantages Flexibility to add any field device to any manufacturer s software head-end. A large range of field devices available. Increased competition for field devices. Disadvantages Loss of unique and differentiated functionality between the device and Software Head-End. Lowest common denominator of functionality. Each field device still requires its own engineering tool to set up and commission. Open protocols have been a good thing for building managers and the supply industry, but there are limitations. Because all devices have to look the same to the software head-end any unique, often advanced, features may not be supported by the protocol, which reduces system functionality to the lowest common denominator. Open Systems White Paper September

5 Single-Vendor versus Multi-Vendor Systems The word proprietary is often considered to have an implicit link to single-vendor systems and a negative connotation in the industry. However, every software head-end contains proprietary technology and is the original intellectual property of the manufacturer even those systems which support open protocols. Once a building manager has selected a particular software head-end, it makes operational and economic sense to continue to use this platform and they are therefore committed, or locked-in, to that one manufacturer. When choosing such a software head-end system, a building manager generally purchases either a single-vendor system direct from the manufacturer or a multi-vendor system through a distribution channel, selecting one of the Value-Added Resellers or System Integrators that offer the system. Keep in mind that the purchasing route has nothing to do with the open-protocol support as both multi-vendor and singlevendor systems may support open protocols. The situation is analogous to the PC industry: one can only buy a Dell computer from Dell through their direct sales model, however their computers will run all the industry standard applications in just the same manner as PCs bought through distribution channels. Some building managers like multi-vendor systems because it gives them a choice of service providers for installation and support. However, as these systems are always custom engineered to meet the requirements of a particular site (e.g. the number of points monitored and controlled, the layout of the site, the building manager specific operational requirements etc.), a qualified service provider must design, install, engineer, commission and maintain a site-specific Building Management System ultimately creating an operational system which is as unique as the site itself. As the complexity and criticality of the engineered system increases, the tie to the service provider, who has the knowledge of how the system is set up, also increases and it becomes increasingly impractical to consider changing service providers, even for multi-vendor systems. Risks can escalate when using smaller integrators whose engineering skills and record keeping may not be assured and whose business may not be as financially secure as a larger business - particularly system manufacturers, whose longevity, skills, resources and commitment to delivering the solution are more certain. Furthermore, working with a single-vendor system manufacturer gives the building manager more confidence that system upgrades for their uniquely-engineered system will be delivered and supported over time. When problems occur with multi-vendor systems, it may be unclear whether the issue is with the work of the integrator or with the system itself, so solutions can take a long time or cost to resolve. Working with the manufacturer removes this potential issue. Multi-Vendor systems Advantages Flexibility to purchase a manufacturer s software head-end system from multiple vendors. Increased competition between vendors to provide installation services and support services. Ability to purchase the product outside the geographical footprint of the manufacturer. Disadvantages Loss of direct contact with the manufacturer of the system for support and special requirements. Variability of the quality of installation of the system and unclear responsibilities. Lack of deep understanding of the system and how to apply it successfully compared to single-vendor systems installed by manufacturer with local presence. Open Systems White Paper September

6 User-Managed versus Closed Systems Some head-end systems include within them the capability to engineer the system (for example the ability to add new openprotocol components), whereas others can only be engineered by the manufacturer or an approved system integrator. Arguably, user-managed systems provide the greatest flexibility for the building manager as they can engineer the system themselves, can use their FM provider to make system changes (usually best with appropriate training), or can call in their system provider to make these changes for them. In all cases, there is usually engineering configuration work required for the field controllers and other system components, even when they are open protocol. Engineering software tools are usually required to do this and these tools are generally restricted to the manufacturer and licensees (the system integrators) although some manufacturers also license their customers or their customers delegated service providers to carry out this engineering work. Whilst selecting multi-vendor systems gives building managers a ready choice of installers and service providers, selecting usermanaged systems gives the building manager and their FM team the ability to engineer the system themselves as they see fit or to call in the expert support of the system provider as appropriate. Where these user-managed systems are provided by the manufacturer, the building manager can also have the confidence that they are dealing directly with the technology developer who is best placed to deliver solutions to requirements that the building manager cannot solve themselves, or to provide the end-to-end, full life-cycle solution as the building manager requires. Choosing the right partner for your Building Management System Choosing a Building Management System creates a raft of technology and supplier choices that will have a big impact, not only on the upfront purchase price, but also on the system s life-cycle costs, reliability, flexibility and on the risks and issues it creates or avoids. Making the right technology choices, minimising the management risks, ensuring the compatibility of the technologies and integrating them all onto the one platform invariably requires expert help, so choice of partner is just as if not more important than the choice of technology. The starting point for choosing the right partner is to ask yourself the following questions: What system will work best in my environment to meet my needs? How complex are my requirements and how critical is the system to my business? How is this system delivered and how will it be maintained and upgraded over time? Who will be the most cost-effective and technically-expert partner over the long term? Open Systems White Paper September

7 What Does Honeywell Building Solutions Offer? Honeywell Building Solutions, part of Honeywell Inc., aims to provide building solutions that offer building managers high levels of functionality coupled with the flexibility to develop their systems as they see fit. We do this with our Enterprise Building Integrator (EBI) head-end, which is a user-managed system that works with all major open protocols. With EBI, our customers or their facilities managers can make additions and changes to their system, but Honeywell is always available to provide its expertise as the system developer to help support, maintain, enhance or extend the system as required. EBI provides an advanced graphical interface, alarm handling, event management and automation, reporting and application integration and delivers high levels of BMS functionality by using our own extended open-protocol field controllers with cost optimisation and energy management capabilities. This head-end also functions as an integration platform for all major building systems including fire, access control and CCTV. We support open protocols where they exist across all of thesedomains, including BACnet, LonWorks and OPC in control and energy systems, ONVIF standards for CCTV and the use of standard, multi-function MIFARE smartcards for access control, giving our customers the advanced capabilities and fl exibility that they require in managing their buildings. Most importantly, though, Honeywell Building Solutions is your partner in the design, engineering, commissioning and maintenance of your building systems to ensure they match the unique requirements of your site and your individual business needs. EBI explained Open Systems White Paper September

8 About Honeywell Honeywell has over 7,000 employees in the UK and almost 1,500 are part of HBS, delivering solutions and services for stadia, airports, hospitals and SMEs nationwide. With global corporate headquarters based in Morristown, New Jersey, Honeywell is a Fortune 100 company that invents and manufactures technologies to address tough challenges linked to global macrotrends such as safety, security and energy. We serve customers worldwide with aerospace products and services; control technologies for buildings, homes and industry; automotive products; turbochargers; and performance materials. With approximately 130,000 employees worldwide, we have an unrelenting focus on quality, delivery, value and technology in everything we make and do. For more information visit Honeywell Building Solutions LonWorks is a registered trademark of Echelon Corporation BACnet is a registered trademark of ASHRAE MIFARE is a registered trademarks of NXP B.V. ONVIF is a registered trademark of Sony Corporation Europe and North Africa Honeywell House Arlington Business Park Bracknell, United Kingdom RG12 1EB +44 (0) OPC is a registered trademark of the OPC Foundation SL en 2013 Honeywell International Inc.