Comparison of Inverter Internal Communication Networks: Lenze System Bus (CAN) vs. Parker AC30 Peer-to-Peer (P2P)

In modern production line automation systems, establishing direct internal communication between drives (Master-Slave) without an intermediate PLC is an extremely effective solution. It helps increase response speed, reduce control latency, and significantly reduce system programming costs.

Two of the most common and powerful internal communication technologies are Lenze System Bus (CAN) and Parker AC30 Peer-to-Peer (P2P). So, what are the key differences between these two technologies in terms of technical architecture, configuration methods, and practical applications?

Let’s take a detailed look at Lenze System Bus (CAN) vs. Parker AC30 Peer-to-Peer (P2P) in the comparison below.

1. Technology Architecture: Traditional Fieldbus vs. Modern Industrial Ethernet

The biggest difference between these two communication standards lies in the Physical Layer and the data transmission architecture.

Lenze System Bus (CAN): A Practical Approach

Lenze’s internal communication standard uses a physical layer based on the CAN Bus (ISO 11898) technology, implemented as the manufacturer’s proprietary Lenze System Bus.

• Operating mechanism: The system uses a traditional Fieldbus network architecture, transmitting and receiving data through dynamic PDO (Process Data Objects) packets configured according to a defined cycle time.
• Transmission speed: 125 kbps – 1 Mbps

Parker AC30 Peer-to-Peer: High-Speed Communication

• Operating mechanism: The P2P protocol on the AC30 enables true peer-to-peer communication between drives through Multicast/Unicast packet transmission. The system also features built-in hardware-based real-time synchronization technology compliant with the IEEE 1588 (PTP) standard.
• Transmission speed: Supports bandwidths of up to 100 Mbps, making it significantly faster than traditional CAN-based networks.

2. Hardware Wiring and Network Topology Comparison

The installation and wiring methods of these two systems also provide completely different experiences for control cabinet engineers.

Lenze CAN Bus Network Wiring on Drives

Lenze’s internal network requires a strict daisy-chain topology, connecting one drive to the next using dedicated shielded twisted-pair cables.

Important note: A 120 Ω termination resistor must be enabled or installed at both ends of the network—the Master at one end and the last Slave at the other. Without proper termination, signal reflections may occur, resulting in unstable communication and repeated network connection errors.

3. Software Configuration: Parameter-Based Setup vs. Intuitive Graphical Interface

Each manufacturer adopts a different approach to programming and system configuration through its engineering software:

• Lenze: Operators use the EASY Navigator software. Configuration requires modifying Parameter Codes (identified by C or P codes) to assign the Node ID, set the Baud rate, and configure the mapping of input/output data words for the CAN-Tx and CAN-Rx channels.
• Parker AC30: The system can be configured intuitively through the graphical interface of PDQ software. The P2P network is managed through two dedicated function blocks: P2P_TX (Data Transmit block) and P2P_RX (Data Receive block). Engineers can simply use a click-and-drag approach to link signal paths between function blocks from one drive to another within the network diagram, making configuration significantly easier and more visual.

4. Quick Comparison Table: Lenze CAN Bus vs. Parker AC30 P2P

🔍 Is It Necessary to Upgrade from Lenze CAN to Parker AC30 P2P?

As industrial machinery increasingly demands higher precision, faster processing speeds, and stable multi-axis synchronization, upgrading from the Lenze CANopen drive communication system to the Peer-to-Peer platform on Parker AC30 can be considered a strategic modernization step. The AC30 solution uses high-speed Ethernet communication combined with IEEE 1588 time synchronization, enabling drives to communicate directly with each other without relying on an intermediate PLC. This helps reduce communication latency, improve synchronization accuracy, and enhance overall system performance.

This upgrade is particularly well suited to applications such as printing machines, rolling mills, film stretching lines, and multi-axis synchronized conveyors, where precise speed control and phase locking are essential. Compared with traditional CAN-based systems, Parker AC30 Peer-to-Peer offers greater flexibility for system expansion, a more optimized control architecture, and improved long-term equipment stability.

We have successfully implemented multiple Lenze-to-Parker AC30 retrofit projects, helping customers modernize their drive systems without replacing the entire machine. Our solutions are designed to ensure fast commissioning, stable operation, and easier maintenance over the long term.

If you are looking for a modern solution to upgrade your industrial drive system, Parker AC30 Peer-to-Peer is an excellent choice for high-performance multi-axis applications.

📞 Contact Us for Consultation & Solution Implementation

We provide:

• Site survey and assessment of the existing system
• Solution consulting optimized for the actual application requirements
• Drive system design, programming, and implementation
• Commissioning, testing, and operational handover
• Post-project technical support

Our experienced engineering team is always ready to support you throughout the process of machine modernization, improving system performance, and enhancing overall system stability.

📞 Hotline: +84 908353714
📧 Email: info@kythuatviet.vn

👉Contact us today to receive expert consultation and find the most suitable solution for your system.