CANopen has been a workhorse of mechanical engineering, medical devices and automation since the late 1990s. But as machines demand more axes, faster cycles and tighter synchronisation, many teams evaluate a move to EtherCAT. The transition is less disruptive than it first appears.
Why teams move
- Bandwidth: EtherCAT’s 100 Mbit/s dwarfs CAN’s 1 Mbit/s, so more data and more nodes fit in a cycle.
- Synchronisation: distributed clocks give sub-microsecond alignment across axes — critical for coordinated motion.
- Topology & wiring: line and ring topologies simplify cabling on large machines.
- One wire for I/O and safety: standard I/O and FSoE safety data share the same network.
Protecting your CANopen investment
The good news for CANopen users is CoE (CANopen over EtherCAT): EtherCAT reuses the CANopen object dictionary and communication model, so much of your device profile, configuration know-how and application logic carries over. The move is an evolution, not a rewrite.
When to stay on CANopen
If your node counts are modest, your cycle times comfortable, and cost and ruggedness are paramount, CANopen remains an excellent, proven choice. The right answer is application-specific — and you do not have to choose blindly.
ISIT-Neperis supplies both CANopen stacks and EtherCAT tooling. Talk through your migration with our team.
See the full side-by-side comparison : CANopen vs EtherCAT — When to Move from CAN to Industrial Ethernet