Struggling with your network implementation?
Five solutions that make Industrial Networking easier
Industrial network protocols like EtherCAT, PROFINET, and EtherNet/IP form the backbone of modern automation systems. Yet implementing these protocols remains a major technical challenge for developers. Varying real-time requirements, complex data models, and strict certification processes all contribute to making industrial networking more difficult than it needs to be. Before we dive into the solutions, it is important to understand why industrial network protocols are so challenging.
Networking challenges
Real-time requirements
Some protocols, like EtherCAT, demand precise timing and deterministic behavior, while others allow more relaxed communication cycles. Meeting these demands often requires careful tuning of both hardware and software.
Device data and configuration
A single device may need to present the same internal data differently across multiple networks, requiring complex data conversion and maintenance of multiple device description files like GSDML (for PROFINET) or EDS (for EtherNet/IP).
Multiple protocol versions
Maintaining multiple protocol versions for the same device line adds further complexity to the development lifecycle. Each protocol stack may require separate firmware builds, testing efforts, and support plans.
Certification and compliance
Many protocols require formal conformance testing by accredited labs, involving strict and evolving standards. Certification processes are time-consuming and costly, often delaying product launches.
Five solutions
With these challenges in mind, it’s clear that succeeding in industrial networking requires more than just technical skills — it demands smart strategies and the right tools. Fortunately, by adopting modern approaches, developers can dramatically reduce complexity, minimize time-to-market risks, and create more flexible, future-ready devices. In the following sections, we explore five practical solutions that have proven effective in making industrial network development faster, easier, and more sustainable.
1. Multi-Protocol Software Platforms
Instead of using separate hardware modules for each protocol, modern solutions allow developers to run multiple software protocols on a single hardware platform. Powerful microcontrollers and SoCs can now handle real-time Ethernet protocols in software without needing specialized ASICs. By designing connected devices this way, companies can drastically reduce BOM costs, minimize design complexity, and eliminate dependency on specific chip suppliers.
Multi-protocol platforms also open the door to firmware-based upgrades, enabling devices to switch between protocols by configuring software rather than hardware — future-proofing products and simplifying inventory management.
2. Abstraction Layers and Unified APIs
Writing different application code for every supported protocol quickly becomes unmanageable. To avoid this, developers can leverage abstraction layers that present a unified API regardless of the underlying network technology. This means the application logic — reading sensor values, controlling actuators, setting parameters — remains the same whether the device is connected to PROFINET, EtherCAT, or any other supported protocol. Unified APIs greatly reduce the amount of protocol-specific code, leading to faster development, fewer bugs, and simpler long-term maintenance.
3. Automated Data Modeling Tools
Creating and maintaining protocol-specific device descriptions manually is error-prone and inefficient. Fortunately, automated data modeling tools now allow developers to define a device’s parameters and I/O structure once.
From a single model, tools can now generate all necessary files; GSDML, EDS and ESI correctly formatted for each protocol.
This automation eliminates inconsistencies between protocol configurations and accelerates changes. If the device’s capabilities are updated, the model can be revised and all files regenerated in a matter of minutes, instead of manually editing multiple protocol-specific files.
4. Pre-Qualified Communication Stacks
Certification processes are notoriously rigorous. Using pre-qualified communication stacks or firmware packages significantly eases this burden. Pre-qualified solutions have already passed critical internal tests, meaning developers primarily need to validate their own integration rather than the protocol implementation itself. This not only reduces the time and cost of certification but also lowers technical risk — helping products reach the market faster without compromising interoperability or compliance.
5. Open Hardware Designs and Flexibility
Flexibility in hardware design plays a crucial role in simplifying protocol integration. Open reference designs or modular hardware platforms allow developers to embed communication solutions into their products without restrictive licensing or vendor lock-in. Moreover, having a single hardware base that supports multiple protocols through firmware changes enables companies to offer customized communication options without redesigning the physical device. This dramatically streamlines product variation management and future protocol expansion.
A Real-World Example: U-Phy by RT-Labs
U-Phy is a software-based multi-protocol firmware that allows developers to implement protocols like PROFINET, EtherCAT, EtherNet/IP, and Modbus/TCP using standard microcontrollers — with no need for protocol-specific hardware.
Using U-Phy’s Device Builder tool, developers model their device’s data structure once. U-Phy then automatically generates all required device descriptions (GSDML, EDS, etc.) and provides a unified API for application development across protocols.
Additionally, U-Phy comes with pre-qualified protocol stacks, significantly simplifying the path to full device certification. For hardware, RT-Labs offers an open reference design called Module 01, which manufacturers can use directly or integrate into their own designs — providing complete flexibility without proprietary restrictions.
In short, U-Phy helps developers focus on building differentiated, high-value industrial devices rather than getting bogged down by the intricacies of protocol implementation.
