Created Date: November 21,2018

Created by: MikeN

I think it would be really great if we could use a P1000 based system as a remote IO base for the larger systems. The size of these P1000 units make them perfect for using as remote/field IO, but as of now we cannot mismatch base types in Productivity. Instead of using a normal CPU for the P1k, we should be able to use something like the remote slave units in the higher end series. Then the hardware would integrate seamlessly into Productivity software and we could create tags for the hardware in the same way the current remote bases work. It would also connect over the Remote IO port rather than the external port using ENet/IP. That way we dont have to futz with any client setup, or assembly instances or any of that. Just let the hardware be discovered like a normal rack, only these little P1k based systems would allow discovery when they are connected to the larger P2000 and P3000 systems. Doing this and using P1000 systems as remote for the larger systems would let us save a ton of space and would promote their use in more systems rather than needing to go the ProtosX or Terminator route.

I mean, just look at the size difference we could have of a P1k based IO compared to adding a P2k based remote rack:

{ "data-align ": "none ", "data-size ": "full ", "data-attachmentid ":119182}

Created Date: November 26,2018

Created by: MikeN

While you could use them via modbus, etc, doing so means you have to use actual modbus write or similar instructions which take a lot more work and much longer to execute. If it behaved like the remote slaves do when you plug in a slave CPU then you can make tags like it is normal local IO, and address the remote IO with all the same instructions like it is local to the main base. It is quite different an experience than addressing everything you want to do from network read/write commands. Sure it works, but it isnt the perfect, seemless integration of remote IO I would love to be able to use.