#338 numbering equipment in sets

Mark Oellermann Wed 18 Nov 2015

Hi, Just wondering if there is (and I've missed it) provision to number equipment in a sequence?

For example, I have a multi-circuit energy meter that is modeled as an equip, with a number of channels all recording energy. They are numbered in the device (channel 1, channel 2 etc.) - how would I number the sensor points? (short of using the ID, which can't be relied upon to be of a specific format, and besides, parsing the ID would defeat the purpose of having a nice model like Haystack).

If I took the path of modeling the meter as separate pieces of equipment, then I still face the same issue - how do I number the meters so I know which channel is which?

Has this been discussed before? Is there a case for a general purpose "sequence" or "order" tag that can be applied to any entity within a grouping. It may also prove useful in being able to number devices in the order they connect to a bus, or pumps in pump sets etc.

Thoughts? Many thanks, Mark

Jason Briggs Wed 18 Nov 2015

My vote is that we add the order tag as a standard. Something like this.

dis: "Pump-1" pump order:1

dis: "Pump-2" pump order:2

Brian Frank Thu 19 Nov 2015

I'm sure people have been doing something in their models, but we don't actually have a standard tag for "numbering". Options would be include:


Unless anyone has additional feedback, I think Jason's proposal to use order is fine. Then that would be the standard tag to use for applying a number to equipment which typically has sequences for cycling such as pumps, chillers, boilers, etc.

Denis OConnor Thu 19 Nov 2015

@Brian It sounds like the order tag would be used to identify "circuits" within a meter.

I propose we use sequence:1, sequence:2 etc to describe the sequence of operation for the equipment such as pumps, chillers, boilers etc.

Jason Briggs Thu 19 Nov 2015

I agree sequence should be for like staging pumps etc. order should be for UI, or being able to just know the order of records. I think sequence is perfect name tag for what you are talking about.

Brian Frank Thu 19 Nov 2015

If its for staging, then why wouldn't we use the term stage? That seems more appropriate than sequence.

Also don't really like having two different tags for essentially the same concept. I think I'd prefer to just use order for all use cases unless there is a strong case that their is really semantic differences between the different types of "ordering"

Leroy Simms Fri 20 Nov 2015

I have used equipNum, but I would vote for num or index. In my opinion sequence or order both imply a set "staging" order and as Brian said stage would be better to indicate that. I feel order or sequence could cause confusion when equipment utilize a lead/lag rotation schedule and are not always started in the same sequence.

Denis OConnor Fri 20 Nov 2015

@Mark I am re-reading your original question. It sounds like you are working with one meter that has multiple inputs.

This sounds similar to an electrical panel that has multiple circuits.

If we model the main panel as an equip and and the circuit meters as separate equips, we can describe the circuits as “Circuit 1 Lighting", "Circuit 2 Pumps” with the appropriate tags such as lighting or hot, water, pump

Mark Oellermann Sun 22 Nov 2015

Dennis, yes, there is likely to be differentiation between the circuits through their load relationships, but I was trying to find a way to avoid having to parse id or description fields, since we need the number for software interrogating the model. Thanks for the thought. Mark

Mark Oellermann Wed 25 Nov 2015

I'm fairly new to all this (hi to those I haven't bumped into before:) What's the process from here in terms of getting a final call on what the tag will be, formalisation (approval etc.), and how is the addition of something like this managed WRT change processes, versioning of the tags spec etc.?

I'm happy with order as seems to be the consensus, or index as suggested by Leroy, though I think there's potential for ambiguity with num since Number is a kind of point.

Brian Frank Wed 2 Dec 2015

This topic really needs to get discussed in conjunction with 208 - we need a holistic design for numbering, ordering, and lead/lag assignments

Denis OConnor Tue 8 Dec 2015

I vote that we do NOT use sequence in this situation. I would use sequence as a tag to describe how equipment is transitioned between stages (if there was a need).

leadLag, Stage seem to have their distinct applications.

From my understanding of the application it sounds like an index.

Jakob Bell Wed 31 May

Hi all,

I realize this is a very old forum topic but I don't see a standard for numbering equipment or points in the docs. Did this land on using order to number any defs that require specific ordering?

Example: dis: "Boiler-1" boiler order:1 dis: "Boiler-2" boiler order:2

If so, can this be added to the docs?

Brian Frank Wed 31 May

The current tag that is defined is stage (not that we might not need another one)

Login or Signup to reply.