cloud bms local bms comparison

ConnectorIO Cloud vs. Local BMS comparison

by

Traditional - Local Building Management System architecture limitations

Traditional BMS or BAS systems have their limitations which result from the architecture used. Here's a quick summary of those.

Infrastructure element

Traditional Building Automation System architecture limitation

Point-to-Point connections

Executed using hardware gateways + programming in a “static” manner.

Gateways

Basic gateways (system couplers)

- $$$ expensive (hundreds EU),- combines only 2 standards,- standards coupling needs to be programmed before operation using industry-specific design tools + firmware update
- gateways operate in a distributed way - passive element, limited communication between gateways.

Gateways with
a webserver

- $$$$ more expensive than the basic solution,
- still lots of programming done outside the gateway

BMS updates

When replacing a single device unit with a newer model the gateway needs to be reconfigured or replaced to match the new hardware parameters.

Response time for data output

Depends on technical parameters of chosen system hardware elements (eg. controller, gateway).
- the least responsive element (hardware or firmware) of the system is the bottleneck of the whole system solution,
- the performance of the entire system has to be defined during the BAS design stage and cannot be easily altered in case of change to single elements of the system (the impact on the whole system should be taken into account),
- the software/firmware should be chosen for the specific case.
- readings are prioritized over two-way communication (output over input).

- Now let's see how the traditional BMS solution compares to ConnectorIO Cloud.

ConnectorIO Cloud BMS vs. Local BMS comparison table

System Comparison

Traditional BMS/BAS

Building Management/Automation System

connectorio logo h50

ConnectorIO Cloud or Local System

Communication protocols

Closed - dedicated to 1 or 2 defined standards

Open - not tied to a specific communication protocol.
Limited only by the physical interfaces.
Device auto-discovery possible in the case of some communication standards.

Data streams (Input/output)

Limited

Configurable, all available channels can be used if necessary

Gateways - basic (system couplers)

- $$$ expensive (hundreds EU),
- combine only 2 standards,
- standards coupling needs to be programmed before operation using industry-specific design tools + firmware update
- gateways operate in a distributed way - passive element, limited communication between gateways.

- changes in the configuration of the edge device are moderately simple,
- no direct physical interaction with the edge device is required
- changes can be applied through the network

Gateways - with webserver

- $$$$ more expensive than the basic solution,
- still lots of programming done outside the gateway

- changes in the configuration of the edge device are moderately simple,
- no direct physical interaction with the edge device is required
- changes can be applied through the network

Operation

Only local - on-premises.
Cloud connection possible but limited to functions programmed in device-specific controllers.

Local or Cloud - on or off-premises

Cloud solution

Limited, not flexible:
- limited to device model and firmware update compatibility.
- usually only mainstream providers available or vendor-specific cloud systems.

Not limited, flexible:
- works with different mainstream and non-mainstream cloud providers.

System device updates

Costly and Complicated - demands controller’s firmware reprogramming or hardware update and intervention of multiple vendors (integrators, BMS operators) on-premises.

Relatively easily, no need for physical intervention.

System operator competences

Highly skilled professionals needed.

IT intervention not required.

Data storage capabilities

Data is usually stored in an SQL database on a physical storage device located on-premises.

Data can be stored locally or in the cloud.

Stored data range

Limited - usually limited to “trend logs” available from the controller’s registers and then copied to the SQL database

Not limited, can be re-programmed, re-defined.

Data retention time

5-60 mins, 1 day, 1 week, 1 month
- limited by the capacity of local BMS data carrier,
- data is being averaged,
- data subject to “blurring” of the extreme values,
- in case of hardware changes, the storage should be replaced as well.

Depends only on the resolution of data probing by device and the storage capacity.
- could be milliseconds and up to months/years of stored data in case of cloud storage.

question

Your opinion?

Do you agree or disagree? Let us know what you think are the biggest challenges of local or cloud building management system implementation.

We will keep updating this section.

For more posts like this, please check:

Comparison

PLC vs. ConnectorIO comparison table

There are many traditional solutions for connecting PLC (Programmable Line Controller) providers

Leave a Comment