Differences and connections between can and CANOPEN

1. What are the similarities and differences between can and CANOPEN:
Can only defines the physical layer and the link layer, but does not define the user layer. You can define some communication conventions on the network as needed. CANOPEN defines the user layer based on CAN, that is, the agreement between users, software, and network terminals for information exchange. 2. From the perspective of the OSI network model, the fieldbus network generally only implements Layer 3 (physical layer), Layer 3 (data link layer), and Layer 3 (Application Layer ). Because the field bus usually only contains one network segment, no layer 3rd (Transport Layer) or layer 4th (Network Layer) is required, and no layer 5th (Session Layer) or layer 6th (description layer) is required).
The can (Controller Area Network) fieldbus only defines Layer 3 and Layer 4 (see the iso11898 standard). In actual design, the two layers are fully implemented by hardware, designers no longer need to develop software or firmware for this purpose ).
At the same time, can only defines the physical layer and the data link layer. The application layer is not completely defined. A high-level protocol is required to define the 11/29-bit identifier in the CAN message and the use of 8-byte data. Moreover, in industrial automation applications based on CAN bus, an open and standardized high-level protocol is increasingly required: This protocol supports the interoperability and interconnectivity of various can manufacturers' devices, it provides standard and unified system communication modes in the CAN network, device function description, and network management functions.
3. can2.0 is a physical layer and link layer protocol, which is basically implemented by hardware. CANOPEN is implemented by software in the application layer protocol.

Differences and connections between can and CANOPEN