I am trying to understand and clarify the use of zone tag and when to use system tag. I believe this needs clarification in the docs.
Here’s what I found:
Starting with Project Haystack’s definitions:
- system: “Grouping of related equipment dedicated to a single application”, link: project-haystack.org/doc/lib-phIoT/system
- zone: “Space associated with a specific system.”, link: project-haystack.org/doc/lib-phIoT/zone-space
The definition of the zone-space is associated only with system element. However, after discussing with architects and MEP engineers, I’ve noticed the following:
Lot of architects refer to zones as group of zones and/or rooms. Then a lot of MEP engineers seeems to use the terms zone and system interchangeably. Consequently, shall the community consider changing the definition to Space associated with a specific purpose, that could be either system or space ? I don’t think that zone shall be restricted to system. Maybe that would mean that we will have to define different zone types, where we define for example zone-area type (eg East Wing containing group of space entities) and zone-system type as it is already defined in the documentation ?
To standardise the definitions based on other ontologies, maybe we shall consider the definition from BOT ontology ?
Zones are areas with spatial 3D volumes, and include, Buildings, Storeys, and Spaces. Zones may contain other zones, Buildings may contain storeys, Storeys may contain spaces.
https://w3c-lbd-cg.github.io/bot/#:~:text=Zones%20are%20areas%20with%20spatial
Also, based on the current definition of zone and system, shouldn’t be added in the spec for system the fact that when we use spaceRef for systems they shall be zones or group of zones since the current definition is “space associated with a specific system” ? Furthermore, when it comes to zones shouldn’t be added in the spec for zones standardised tags referring to the indoor air quality and occupancy eg indoor air quality zone and occupancy zone like we have hvac-zone and lighting-zone?
I welcome the thoughts of the community on that matter. Maybe a WG needs to be created where zone and system are clarified and further developed hand in hand . Happy to lead on that as well
Best Regards, Georgios Grigoriou
Brian FrankThu 10 Aug
Maybe we can tweak the language, but I think its pretty clear:
space: Space is a three-dimensional volume in the built environment (already pretty close to BOT definition you provided)
zone: is a specific type of space, which means that is a three-dimensional volume. You should be able to outline a zone on a floor plan
So zone is a geometry on a floor plan that is related to a system. But a system is the actual equipment related to the function. A zone is served by a system, but is not a system itself.
Furthermore, when it comes to zones shouldn’t be added in the spec for zones standardised tags referring to the indoor air quality
I get the difference between zone and system. I guess my desire for clarification comes from the different terminology that people use in the industry.
It just seems that for a lot of architects and design engineers zone also means a collection of space entities
Example: North Wing comprises a collection of room entities in the north of a building. I saw that a couple of times in drawings as well defining a zone based on spaces covering a purpose that is not necessarily system oriented.
I guess this can be modelled as a collections/group of spaces in order to be fully compatible with the Haystack Ontology? Just wanted to check if we could harmonize standardise methodology as that the idea of referring to collection of space entities as zones covering a specific purpose that is not necessarily system oriented is quite broad.
Not sure I follow, but we already have airQualityZonePoints
Yes I agree it just that they don’t appear in the hierarchy tree of the space here https://project-haystack.org/doc/appendix/space apart from hvac-zone-space and lighting-zone-space
Andy FrankThu 10 Aug
I found the language around spaces and zones to be confusing as well.
It just seems that for a lot of architects and design engineers zone also means a collection of space entities
This is how we ended up modeling zones and spaces, and is largely based on how it gets defined in tools like Revit (you put physical spaces into logical zones).
The physical vs. logical part, I think, warrants separate concepts. I wasn't able to find much around this in the docs, but it seems like it's not captured exactly right?
annie dehghaniFri 11 Aug
@Georgios, I think you might be getting at a need for terminology for groupings of room-spaces such as wings or suites, similar to what was raised in this post back in 2017?
RealEstateCore defines a "SubBuilding" type which maybe captures these larger-than-a-room, smaller-than-a-building space type ? That could be a adapted to Haystack for these spaces?
Yes I agree it just that they don’t appear in the hierarchy tree of the space here https://project-haystack.org/doc/appendix/space apart from hvac-zone-space and lighting-zone-space
I agree that IAQ and occ sensor points could exist outside of HVAC or Lighting zones. For example, if you have "standalone" or "IOT" occ or IAQ sensors. What we have done to solve this is to model the sensors as devices and tie the devices to the space via a spaceRef.
On a related note, I recently reviewed the docs, and the relationships in Haystack between points, equips, zones and spaces are a little unclear to me.
For example, if you have an HVAC equip serving a zone, what is the correct way to relate the zone and the equip? spaceRef? That gets a little muddy because spaceRef can also be used for the physical location of the equip. To solve this, we have added our own fooZoneRefs -- hvaceZoneRef and lightingZoneRef to tie HVAC equipment to zones and lighting points to zones while still being able to denote the physical location of assets with spaceRef
Frank SmitMon 14 Aug
I agree with Georgios as an SI it is for us also confusing when to use zone, floor or space or even room. Mech Engineers and archtect here in Europe talk about that een zone or area is part of a building. A zone or floor can have individual spaces or rooms. But then it get confusing because we say here a space could be everthing like office (Officespace for rent) or gym even the blue sky. If we use room then we talk about a specified function in that space like Livingroom, Classroom or Bathroom. For the most mech engineers it is clear if we use Floor and then Zone in case there of open space office or it is a big open space like a cantinee and Room if there a cell offices or indivual rooms like bathRoom or DirectorsRoom. Then another point most controls manufactures are talking about a roomcontroller or roomcontrol solution and not about a space controller. In the LONmark functional Profiles they use spaceTemp. So is it spaceTemp or roomTemp what is right? I don't want to make it complex but in my opion it should so that you can find data from a sensor without looking on a drawing of course also for an equipment (on which floor and in which zone or room). Today there are also more types of equipment in a zone or room think about light or sunblind controller but also energyvalves or smart pumps. May be the hierarchy should be site → building→ floor →zone or room→ equipment→ points. To make Haystack more acceptable we should take notice of the comment of Annie "On a related note, I recently reviewed the docs, and the relationships in Haystack between points, equips, zones and spaces are a little unclear to me.
Georgios Grigoriou Thu 10 Aug
I am trying to understand and clarify the use of zone tag and when to use system tag. I believe this needs clarification in the docs.
Here’s what I found:
The definition of the zone-space is associated only with system element. However, after discussing with architects and MEP engineers, I’ve noticed the following:
I welcome the thoughts of the community on that matter. Maybe a WG needs to be created where zone and system are clarified and further developed hand in hand . Happy to lead on that as well
Best Regards, Georgios Grigoriou
Brian Frank Thu 10 Aug
Maybe we can tweak the language, but I think its pretty clear:
So zone is a geometry on a floor plan that is related to a system. But a system is the actual equipment related to the function. A zone is served by a system, but is not a system itself.
Not sure I follow, but we already have airQualityZonePoints
Georgios Grigoriou Thu 10 Aug
Hi Brian,
I get the difference between zone and system. I guess my desire for clarification comes from the different terminology that people use in the industry.
It just seems that for a lot of architects and design engineers zone also means a collection of space entities
Example: North Wing comprises a collection of room entities in the north of a building. I saw that a couple of times in drawings as well defining a zone based on spaces covering a purpose that is not necessarily system oriented.
I guess this can be modelled as a collections/group of spaces in order to be fully compatible with the Haystack Ontology? Just wanted to check if we could harmonize standardise methodology as that the idea of referring to collection of space entities as zones covering a specific purpose that is not necessarily system oriented is quite broad.
Yes I agree it just that they don’t appear in the hierarchy tree of the space here https://project-haystack.org/doc/appendix/space apart from hvac-zone-space and lighting-zone-space
Andy Frank Thu 10 Aug
I found the language around spaces and zones to be confusing as well.
This is how we ended up modeling zones and spaces, and is largely based on how it gets defined in tools like Revit (you put physical spaces into logical zones).
The physical vs. logical part, I think, warrants separate concepts. I wasn't able to find much around this in the docs, but it seems like it's not captured exactly right?
annie dehghani Fri 11 Aug
@Georgios, I think you might be getting at a need for terminology for groupings of
room-spacessuch as wings or suites, similar to what was raised in this post back in 2017?RealEstateCore defines a "SubBuilding" type which maybe captures these larger-than-a-room, smaller-than-a-building space type ? That could be a adapted to Haystack for these spaces?
I agree that IAQ and occ sensor points could exist outside of HVAC or Lighting zones. For example, if you have "standalone" or "IOT" occ or IAQ sensors. What we have done to solve this is to model the sensors as devices and tie the devices to the space via a
spaceRef.On a related note, I recently reviewed the docs, and the relationships in Haystack between points, equips, zones and spaces are a little unclear to me.
For example, if you have an HVAC equip serving a zone, what is the correct way to relate the zone and the equip?
spaceRef? That gets a little muddy becausespaceRefcan also be used for the physical location of theequip. To solve this, we have added our ownfooZoneRefs --hvaceZoneRefandlightingZoneRefto tie HVAC equipment to zones and lighting points to zones while still being able to denote the physical location of assets withspaceRefFrank Smit Mon 14 Aug
I agree with Georgios as an SI it is for us also confusing when to use zone, floor or space or even room. Mech Engineers and archtect here in Europe talk about that een zone or area is part of a building. A zone or floor can have individual spaces or rooms. But then it get confusing because we say here a space could be everthing like office (Officespace for rent) or gym even the blue sky. If we use room then we talk about a specified function in that space like Livingroom, Classroom or Bathroom. For the most mech engineers it is clear if we use Floor and then Zone in case there of open space office or it is a big open space like a cantinee and Room if there a cell offices or indivual rooms like bathRoom or DirectorsRoom. Then another point most controls manufactures are talking about a roomcontroller or roomcontrol solution and not about a space controller. In the LONmark functional Profiles they use spaceTemp. So is it spaceTemp or roomTemp what is right? I don't want to make it complex but in my opion it should so that you can find data from a sensor without looking on a drawing of course also for an equipment (on which floor and in which zone or room). Today there are also more types of equipment in a zone or room think about light or sunblind controller but also energyvalves or smart pumps. May be the hierarchy should be site → building→ floor →zone or room→ equipment→ points. To make Haystack more acceptable we should take notice of the comment of Annie "On a related note, I recently reviewed the docs, and the relationships in Haystack between points, equips, zones and spaces are a little unclear to me.