(I assume you mean tense in the ordinary “layman’s” sense which includes all the verb constructions rather than one of the narrower technical senses in which the word is used by linguists.)
Can, like all the other English full modals, is “defective”: it is employed only in two finite forms, and has no infinitive or participial forms. Consequently, it can only appear as the first verb in a construction (∗ marks unacceptable utterances):
It cannot appear as an infinitive following another modal or in an infinitival clause:
∗ I will can do that. → okI will be able to do that.
∗ I want to can do that. → okI want to be able to do that.
It cannot appear as a past participle following HAVE in a perfect construction:
∗ I have canned do that. → okI have been able to do that.
It cannot appear as a gerund-participle:
∗ Canning do so, I left. → okBeing able to do so, I left.
∗ Canning do that takes study. → okBeing able to do that takes study.
(It also cannot appear following BE in the progressive construction, but neither can be able to, ordinarily, because the sense of both is stative:
∗ I am canning do that. → ∗ I am being able to do that.
And of course no modal verb or semi-modal verb construction can appear in the passive, because these are all intransitive:
∗ I was canned. → ∗I was been able.
Can has one quirk which it does not share with the other full modals: the modal perfect can have done ordinarily appears only in the negative, or (very rarely) as an emphatic contradicting a preceding negative:
∗ He can have finished already. but
okHe cannot have finished already. and
okNot so: he can have finished already, and has done so!